North Korea and US politics

[dionysus]

yes, the man has the body of a god
oops, auto-correct
body of a gourd

 

[Kroffe]

yes, the man has the body of a god
oops, auto-correct
body of a gourd

Wait, like a fat bastard?
Actually tried using this gif above, but they have restricted gifs at 2mb i think.
Used to be 4mb or something. Its like im being censored.
But since im so smartysmart, i figured out i can just link the gifs instead of uploading them to the forum.

Old Attachment (Invalid)

 

[dionysus]

gods that's scary lol

 

[Kroffe]

gods that's scary lol

I know right!!
Its like, now im so limited in what kind of gifs i can use.
Its like they are trying to silence me.

Wait... you were probably talking about fat-trump gif.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Yet more "winning" for Mr T, I am sure he's having lots of fun.

This at his last rally a few days ago. Mr T making it personal again, you could call it a recipe for disaster. IT is good though that people finally seem to see that all he does is spout lie after lie.



It looks like Louisiana is indeed sending a message to Washington and that by electing a Democrat!

 

[ternur]

kroffe when it comes to politics, you're not the same cuddly bear you normally are, you get your claws out straightaway

The bears are not what they seem.

 

[mack341]

The bears are not what they seem.

wow I never realised they were that mobile in attack mode, no wonder meeting one is fatal.

Do you have wild brown bears in Finland and next door in sweden?

I can just imagine the feeling of dread at seeing one in the woods and he sees or smells you...dinner time

 

[ternur]

wow I never realised they were that mobile in attack mode, no wonder meeting one is fatal.

Do you have wild brown bears in Finland and next door in sweden?

I can just imagine the feeling of dread at seeing one in the woods and he sees or smells you...dinner time

I think @Kroffe farms them somewhere in Swedenland.

There are around 2100 wild bears here. For some reason they don't respect borders, they just wander from Sweden and Russia and do as they please. How rude are they.

 

[Kroffe]

I think @Kroffe farms them somewhere in Swedenland.

There are around 2100 wild bears here. For some reason they don't respect borders, they just wander from Sweden and Russia and do as they please. How rude are they.

2018 they estimated 2900 bears were chilling in our forests.
Its pretty rare seeing one.
If you are out walking in the woods, just make sure you dont sneak around like a ninja.
You dont want to sneak up on a Mama Moose or Mama Bear chilling with their offspring (animal children, not the band)

 

[mack341]

2018 they estimated 2900 bears were chilling in our forests.
Its pretty rare seeing one.
If you are out walking in the woods, just make sure you dont sneak around like a ninja.
You dont want to sneak up on a Mama Moose or Mama Bear chilling with their offspring (animal children, not the band)

might be better odds stumbling on a bear than getting a doa2 wildline

you must have roaming wolf packs in the woods as well in sweden? I had always thought it would be nice to hike/ramble in the scandi countries, having a few 2nd thoughts now, I quite like the way my limbs are currently attached to my body... any dangerous snakes or spiders to add to the list?

 

[Kroffe]

might be better odds stumbling on a bear than getting a doa2 wildline

you must have roaming wolf packs in the woods as well in sweden? I had always thought it would be nice to hike/ramble in the scandi countries, having a few 2nd thoughts now, I quite like the way my limbs are currently attached to my body... any dangerous snakes or spiders to add to the list?

Nah, its pretty chill as far as venomous animals go.
I think Vipers may be the worst we got, and they are mostly a danger for pets.
Its a bit like with bees. Harmless for most humans but if you are sensitive to that kind of venom, you might be in trouble.

And since we have a thing called Allemansrätten here, its a pretty great place to hike around in.
Basically means you can stay wherever you want, if not staying longer than a day or two.
Just leave the place as you found it and its all good.
This is for the forests ofc.. You cant go camping on someones lawn.

 

[mack341]

Kroffe, after viewing the VS thread on privacy I was having a gander on google about sweden and spying on the public, but got distracted by an article about the assassination of the Swedish prime minister Olof Palme in 1986 [which I don't believe I'd ever heard about before, maybe in passing the name rings a bell ] which has never been solved ?

Sounds like one for the conspiracy files/CM conspiracy group...or the NK thread

 

[Kroffe]

Kroffe, after viewing the VS thread on privacy I was having a gander on google about sweden and spying on the public, but got distracted by an article about the assassination of the Swedish prime minister Olof Palme in 1986 [which I don't believe I'd ever heard about before, maybe in passing the name rings a bell ] which has never been solved ?

Sounds like one for the conspiracy files/CM conspiracy group...or the NK thread

I was born 1986, and with that, this discussion is over.
We dont talk about the incident.

 

[Kroffe]

But for real tho. Palmes murder has a bunch of conspiracy theories out there.
So much not making any sense, and false confessions etc.
Its pretty crazy it has not been solved.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[mack341]

I was born 1986, and with that, this discussion is over.
We dont talk about the incident.

Fair enough, does seem it was and still is a seismic event in swedish history.

I respect your wish, my lips are sealed.

 

[Kroffe]

Fair enough, does seem it was and still is a seismic event in swedish history.

I respect your wish, my lips are sealed.

Yeah, i cant really discuss it since i dont remember the details.
I just remember hearing a voice just after i was born. The voice asked me if we should go ahead with the Palme-plan, and if i had given my go-ahead for the Nuclear experiment in Chernobyl.
I think i said yes, but im not 100% sure.
Thats why i dont speak much about the incident.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Trump's having a bout of dementia it seems:

Tell Jennifer Williams, whoever that is, to read BOTH transcripts of the presidential calls, & see the just released ststement from Ukraine. Then she should meet with the other Never Trumpers, who I don’t know & mostly never even heard of, & work out a better presidential attack!

She was a special advisor to Pence on Russia, ofcourse he knows who she is...

 

[mack341]

Yeah, i cant really discuss it since i dont remember the details.
I just remember hearing a voice just after i was born. The voice asked me if we should go ahead with the Palme-plan, and if i had given my go-ahead for the Nuclear experiment in Chernobyl.
I think i said yes, but im not 100% sure.
Thats why i dont speak much about the incident.

haha it was you, a baby assassin using stilts and a long mac!
No it's a fascinating subject, although upsetting for many in sweden. I was interested to read that apparently stieg larsson was looking into the case not long before he died of a heart attack aged only 50...hmm I don't know if that is true but some coincidence.

It would be amazing if one day all the big mystery's and unsolved questions could be answered, motive is key in cases like this and the ability/means to evade detection.

But will leave it there and return to good old donald

The impeachment trial is another farce I'm sorry to say, it's a fishing trip, let's make a charge against the president [the biden quid pro quo claim] and then we can question all these govt officials under oath and hopefully one or two will drop a bombsell revelation we can then use as the original charge was going nowhere, it's a means to an end.

 

[Harry_BKK]

haha it was you, a baby assassin using stilts and a long mac!
No it's a fascinating subject, although upsetting for many in sweden. I was interested to read that apparently stieg larsson was looking into the case not long before he died of a heart attack aged only 50...hmm I don't know if that is true but some coincidence.

It would be amazing if one day all the big mystery's and unsolved questions could be answered, motive is key in cases like this and the ability/means to evade detection.

But will leave it there and return to good old donald

The impeachment trial is another farce I'm sorry to say, it's a fishing trip, let's make a charge against the president [the biden quid pro quo claim] and then we can question all these govt officials under oath and hopefully one or two will drop a bombsell revelation we can then use as the original charge was going nowhere, it's a means to an end.

I don't think it is a farce because it is not just one call. It is the corrupt lead-up to the call and what was supposed to follow after the call. It was a pre-meditated campaign to make sure his political opponent is tarnished. That is against the US constitution no matter how much you would love your idol to be innocent.

I read an article on a site which linked to this story, would think it lays out the development in a good chronological order and also gives a little insight into how Mr T thinks he can get away with anything he does:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

While I can see that there are plenty of people who would like to see Mr T gone, he has brought this onto himself through his own doing. According to his own people, he has been warned multiple times that the conspiracy theories have been debunked many times over, yet he thought he is the smarter one (as usual ) and knows it all better. Now he will suffer the consequences for his deeds.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Trump's having a bout of dementia it seems:



She was a special advisor to Pence on Russia, ofcourse he knows who she is...

I am pretty sure we have not seen anything yet that is too shocking. But I am very sure it will get much worse as the inquiry is proceeding. Especially the language he will be using will show the real Mr T, an un-educated real-estate braggart from NY.

 

[mack341]

I don't think it is a farce because it is not just one call. It is the corrupt lead-up to the call and what was supposed to follow after the call. It was a pre-meditated campaign to make sure his political opponent is tarnished. That is against the US constitution no matter how much you would love your idol to be innocent.

I read an article on a site which linked to this story, would think it lays out the development in a good chronological order and also give a little insight into how Mr T thinks he can get away with anything he does:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

I just think the fact the focus is so much on the ukraine, neutrals in the middle will feel apathy, who cares about the ukraine honestly. And If biden and his son had done nothing wrong then trump was requesting the ukrainians to investigate hot air.

As the journalist kimberley strassel was saying on the lou dobbs show the other day [lou was away] and trump posted the clip on his twitter, where is the quo in this quid pro quo, the ukrainians gave trump nothing he gave them the aid. It is a good interview and covers the differences between this impeachment process and the ones before.

The republicans in the senate aren't going to uphold the impeachment verdict because of this hazy biden quid pro quo, so it's really about influencing the public, will they even bother watching if it carries on in the same 'he says, she says fashion' - all hearsay.

I'm not sure adam schiff is the most credible person either to be leading this, I don't know if he comes from a legal background but I think somebody with a legal mind/training would be required. If you try to block too many people from asking questions it begins to look evasive and dodgy, let the questions and answers fall on their own merit.

The whole charge, sequence of events needs to be boiled down so the public can understand it, I don't really see how bill taylor and his predecessor have moved the story on much, in which case that segment was a waste of time and you can't afford to waste the public's time with these things.

I can't disagree that trump is a real estate braggart from NY, but he is a bit more than that too.

 

[Harry_BKK]

I just think the fact the focus is so much on the ukraine, neutrals in the middle will feel apathy, who cares about the ukraine honestly. And If biden and his son had done nothing wrong then trump was requesting the ukrainians to investigate hot air.

As the journalist kimberley strassel was saying on the lou dobbs show the other day [lou was away] and trump posted the clip on his twitter, where is the quo in this quid pro quo, the ukrainians gave trump nothing he gave them the aid. It is a good interview and covers the differences between this impeachment process and the ones before.

The republicans in the senate aren't going to uphold the impeachment verdict because of this hazy biden quid pro quo, so it's really about influencing the public, will they even bother watching if it carries on in the same 'he says, she says fashion' - all hearsay.

I'm not sure adam schiff is the most credible person either to be leading this, I don't know if he comes from a legal background but I think somebody with a legal mind/training would be required. If you try to block too many people from asking questions it begins to look evasive and dodgy, let the questions and answers fall on their own merit.

The whole charge, sequence of events needs to be boiled down so the public can understand it, I don't really see how bill taylor and his predecessor have moved the story on much, in which case that segment was a waste of time and you can't afford to waste the public's time with these things.

I can't disagree that trump is a real estate braggart from NY, but he is a bit more than that too.

You do not need a "quo". The mere asking of a foreign country for help with your political campaign is totally sufficient.

And given another few days, the Ukrainians would have announced the investigations. They had already agreed (as Sondland said in his phone call). An interview with Zelensky on CNN was scheduled to happen and was then cancelled when the whistleblower report became public. So just a few more days, and you would have had the clear "quo".

Again, this is not about Biden, it is the corrupt build-up that undermines US national security in exchange for political aid in Mr T's campaign.

Schiff is an ex-US attorney from California, so I would say he is the right person for the job. Until now, he has been blocking only questions which have nothing to do with the case, e.g. Nunes and others trying to advance yet again the same conspiracy theories. Please make the effort to watch the proceedings live and don't simply believe what Lou and Fox are telling you or want you to see.

As for hearsay, well, Mr T is blocking all direct witnesses from testifying. Just like in a mob case where such tactics are common, you build a case with the resources you have. BTW, David Holmes and Jennifer Williams are direct witnesses and they corroborated the story. It will be an interesting Wednesday when Sondland testifies again as he nearly perjured himself already once.

Investigating Biden would be totally OK, however, this was not about the investigation itself. Mr T wanted simply to have the Ukrainians announce the investigations because that would have been enough to sink Biden's bid for the presidency. He doesn't care one single bit about the investigation itself and even less about corruption.

BTW, Mr T was not the one who released the aid as he claims. It was the State Deparment legal office who said that there is no legal standing in withholding it.

 

[mack341]

You do not need a "quo". The mere asking of a foreign country for help with your political campaign is totally sufficient.

And given another few days, the Ukrainians would have announced the investigations. They had already agreed (as Sondland said in his phone call). An interview with Zelensky on CNN was scheduled to happen and was then cancelled when the whistleblower report became public. So just a few more days, and you would have had the clear "quo".

Again, this is not about Biden, it is the corrupt build-up that undermines US national security in exchange for political aid in Mr T's campaign.

Schiff is an ex-US attorney from California, so I would say he is the right person for the job. Until now, he has been blocking only questions which have nothing to do with the case, e.g. Nunes and others trying to advance yet again the same conspiracy theories. Please make the effort to watch the proceedings live and don't simply believe what Lou and Fox are telling you or want you to see.

As for hearsay, well, Mr T is blocking all direct witnesses from testifying. Just like in a mob case where such tactics are common, you build a case with the resources you have. BTW, David Holmes and Jennifer Williams are direct witnesses and they corroborated the story. It will be an interesting Wednesday when Sondland testifies again as he nearly perjured himself already once.

Investigating Biden would be totally OK, however, this was not about the investigation itself. Mr T wanted simply to have the Ukrainians announce the investigations because that would have been enough to sink Biden's bid for the presidency. He doesn't care one single bit about the investigation itself and even less about corruption.

BTW, Mr T was not the one who released the aid as he claims. It was the State Deparment legal office who said that there is no legal standing in withholding it.

Right I gotcha, trump wanted the ukraine to announce an investigation had begun, that's not an angle I'd heard till now, maybe the ukrainian officials involved in the conversations etc.. will also need to testify under oath

I'm sorry but I don't think I could watch the whole hearings, I watched a bit earlier today of marie's testimony, but it all felt a little bit unexciting. I don't think she would've found trump's tweet intimidating, he slags off loads of people, she'd probably thinks he must be rattled and I'm getting even.

In a procedure or process if your chairman, as I guess schiff is, has already completely made up their mind, which he has clearly from before day 1...he will try to orchestrate the proceedings to get the outcome he wants, I don't think that is exactly compatible with having a fair or balanced hearing.

Surely even if you despise trump you must be able to see the shortcomings of the way this process has been handled so far, would anyone want to be investigated this way, it looks like a kangaroo, political court.

 

[Harry_BKK]

Right I gotcha, trump wanted the ukraine to announce an investigation had begun, that's not an angle I'd heard till now, maybe the ukrainian officials involved in the conversations etc.. will also need to testify under oath

I'm sorry but I don't think I could watch the whole hearings, I watched a bit earlier today of marie's testimony, but it all felt a little bit unexciting. I don't think she would've found trump's tweet intimidating, he slags off loads of people, she'd probably thinks he must be rattled and I'm getting even.

In a procedure or process if your chairman, as I guess schiff is, has already completely made up their mind, which he has clearly from before day 1...he will try to orchestrate the proceedings to get the outcome he wants, I don't think that is exactly compatible with having a fair or balanced hearing.

Surely even if you despise trump you must be able to see the shortcomings of the way this process has been handled so far, would anyone want to be investigated this way, it looks like a kangaroo, political court.

I'll quote Moscow Mitch: "I will do everything I can so Obama will be a 1-term president." ......Geez mack, take your blinders off!

And no, the Ukrainians do not have to testify. It is plainly to establish whether Mr T tried to engage a foreign power to help with his political campaign. Whether the Ukrainians did or not, does not matter. Trying to rob a bank is a crime even if it fails.

FYI, impeachment in the House is a political process, not a criminal trial.

The trial will come in the Senate.

The Republicans had no issues which such a process when they impeached Clinton or investigated Hillary for that matter. You can watch some of the hearings from Clinton's impeachment and you will realize that it was in no way different.

The majority in the House is driving the process in the direction they want. It is how the framers of the constitution thought it would be, that is why you have a trial in the Senate where you will need a 2/3 majority.

If this is a kangaroo court, what was Hillary's countless Benghazi investigations or Clinton's impeachment in your view? BTW, just for FYI. The Republican majority cut the funding for embassies years before Benghazi happened and then tried to blame Hillary and Obama for not doing enough.

 

[sufferinsilence]

Right I gotcha, trump wanted the ukraine to announce an investigation had begun, that's not an angle I'd heard till now, maybe the ukrainian officials involved in the conversations etc.. will also need to testify under oath

I'm sorry but I don't think I could watch the whole hearings, I watched a bit earlier today of marie's testimony, but it all felt a little bit unexciting. I don't think she would've found trump's tweet intimidating, he slags off loads of people, she'd probably thinks he must be rattled and I'm getting even.

In a procedure or process if your chairman, as I guess schiff is, has already completely made up their mind, which he has clearly from before day 1...he will try to orchestrate the proceedings to get the outcome he wants, I don't think that is exactly compatible with having a fair or balanced hearing.

Surely even if you despise trump you must be able to see the shortcomings of the way this process has been handled so far, would anyone want to be investigated this way, it looks like a kangaroo, political court.

And yet they're using the rules the republican majority have approved in 2015.

Is it fair and balanced? Probably not, because it's ALL politically motivated. But so was the impeachment of Bill Clinton by the republicans. Would it be fair and balanced if a judge appointed by one of the former presidents or by president Trump was chairman? Probably not. That's the problem of the American system, especially in these very partisan times where politicians from both sides of the aisle are just trying to push their agenda instead of trying to do what's best for the people they serve.

And when it goes to the Senate the Chief Justice of the United States will be presiding, who was nominated by George W. Bush.