President Trump

Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Current political and economic situation is the excuse they've given me. Something about the economics of me not funding their tickets ;-)
Click to expand...
Joking aside, it can't be easy to see your kids if they live in a different country, even if you were to dib your hand in your pocket to fund their trips.
 
DrBlueBob said:
Joking aside, it can't be easy to see your kids if they live in a different country, even if you were to dib your hand in your pocket to fund their trips.
Click to expand...
We try and get back to the UK a couple of times a year if we can. It's a massive pain in the arse for the 2 of us with multiple flights, customs, hotels and hire cars. I can't imagine how difficult it would be for them travelling with the grandkids.
 
mosssideblue said:
Not me mate, been saying for ages how he’s not only killing the US off
Click to expand...
There’s a few of us that have never given him the benefit of the doubt since he appeared on the political scene in 2015, mainly because I’ve never been in doubt. It’s only a small consolation to have been proven 100% right.
 
west didsblue said:
There’s a few of us that have never given him the benefit of the doubt since he appeared on the political scene in 2015, mainly because I’ve never been in doubt. It’s only a small consolation to have been proven 100% right.
Click to expand...
Longer than that for me. I've followed his antics since 'Art of the Deal' in the mid-80's, and more so since the 1989 fatal helicopter crash that killed 3 of his casino executives.

Even if you scratch the surface it doesn't take much to be deep in dirt with this guy. He is rotten to the core.
 
Remember how the Maga mob went after Kimmel amongst a few others after Kirks murder despite them not even saying anything remotely bad? What Trump has said after the Reiners murders is an abhorrent disgrace, far worse than anything any public figure said about Kirk, are those same people going to have the same outrage towards Trump? You'd think so, because they're definitely not hyprocrites...
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Longer than that for me. I've followed his antics since 'Art of the Deal' in the mid-80's, and more so since the 1989 fatal helicopter crash that killed 3 of his casino executives.

Even if you scratch the surface it doesn't take much to be deep in dirt with this guy. He is rotten to the core.
Click to expand...
I too have been aware him for years but prior to 2015 it was a lot easier to ignore the twat.
 
west didsblue said:
I too have been aware him for years but prior to 2015 it was a lot easier to ignore the twat.
Click to expand...
His current adoration amongst his base can be traced back directly to the totally false image of him portrayed on 'The Apprentice USA'.

The guy was an absolute loser with multiple bankruptcies, including running multiple casinos into the ground, but Marc Burnett gave him a facelift and elevated his status to that of a powerful and successful businessman when he was anything but.

Burnett has a lot to answer for, and the rest is history.
 
An excellent albeit sobering assessment of Russian influence over Trump and how it can be explained without him being an agent as such.

tomorrowsaffairs.com

A tempting mark—why is Trump behaving in ways that benefit Moscow?

Moscow appears to have used these vulnerabilities to influence Donald Trump, and, unfortunately, has done so with considerable success
tomorrowsaffairs.com tomorrowsaffairs.com


For an intelligence professional, Trump is not hard to understand or to manipulate.

To Putin, he is a tempting mark and full of weaknesses that are easily exploited.

He is narcissistic, greedy, morally loose, not especially loyal to his country, and fuzzy on the difference between right and wrong.

For a competent intelligence service, it would be malpractice not to notice his mental blind spots, obsessive need for affirmation, instinct to lie and conceal, and willingness to cut ethical and legal corners for personal gain.

Moscow appears to have used these vulnerabilities to influence Donald Trump, and, unfortunately, has done so with considerable success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BTH
roubaixtuesday said:
An excellent albeit sobering assessment of Russian influence over Trump and how it can be explained without him being an agent as such.

tomorrowsaffairs.com

A tempting mark—why is Trump behaving in ways that benefit Moscow?

Moscow appears to have used these vulnerabilities to influence Donald Trump, and, unfortunately, has done so with considerable success
tomorrowsaffairs.com tomorrowsaffairs.com


For an intelligence professional, Trump is not hard to understand or to manipulate.

To Putin, he is a tempting mark and full of weaknesses that are easily exploited.

He is narcissistic, greedy, morally loose, not especially loyal to his country, and fuzzy on the difference between right and wrong.

For a competent intelligence service, it would be malpractice not to notice his mental blind spots, obsessive need for affirmation, instinct to lie and conceal, and willingness to cut ethical and legal corners for personal gain.

Moscow appears to have used these vulnerabilities to influence Donald Trump, and, unfortunately, has done so with considerable success.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying there isn't a treasure trove of compromising imagery/audio/video/financial records out there, but he only has to believe there is for him to be putty in the hands of anyone claiming they have access to such compromising information, and for that to be true he clearly has to know he's done something seriously illegal.
 
roubaixtuesday said:
An excellent albeit sobering assessment of Russian influence over Trump and how it can be explained without him being an agent as such.

tomorrowsaffairs.com

A tempting mark—why is Trump behaving in ways that benefit Moscow?

Moscow appears to have used these vulnerabilities to influence Donald Trump, and, unfortunately, has done so with considerable success
tomorrowsaffairs.com tomorrowsaffairs.com


For an intelligence professional, Trump is not hard to understand or to manipulate.

To Putin, he is a tempting mark and full of weaknesses that are easily exploited.

He is narcissistic, greedy, morally loose, not especially loyal to his country, and fuzzy on the difference between right and wrong.

For a competent intelligence service, it would be malpractice not to notice his mental blind spots, obsessive need for affirmation, instinct to lie and conceal, and willingness to cut ethical and legal corners for personal gain.

Moscow appears to have used these vulnerabilities to influence Donald Trump, and, unfortunately, has done so with considerable success.
Click to expand...
Nah, the US are our biggest and bestest allies. The Don is a legend who isn't an evil ****, just a bit misunderstood. In fact we should be begging him to come and save the UK from those nasty left wingers... or something like that if you read the guff Jacob-Rees Brewster comes out with.

Cunts.
 
roubaixtuesday said:
...


There are, unfortunately, several reasons this is damaging for the BBC

(1) I understand the BBC commercial arm has ambitions to expand in the US. Trump controls US regulators

(2) Every time the legal case is raised, it damages the BBCs reputation, which is the single thing of greatest value to the BBC.

(3) Every time the case is raised it helps Trump, because the single most important thing to him is to devalue truth (hence "truth social"). If facts ever become important again, Trump really is screwed. So it's worthwhile for Trump to spend $millions on this because...

(4) Regardless of merit, it will cost $millions to the BBC to defend (I heard a $50-100M estimate). So BBC lawyers will likely recommend settling at a fraction of that.

This is how the law works, on this case and everywhere else. If you're rich enough, the process itself can be used to force the other side into submission. Regardless as to the rights and wrongs.
Click to expand...
Thanks for explaining how the law works.

Don’t disagree with much you’ve posted in points 1-3 but see them as fairly ancillary to point 4: I believe the fall off from licence fee revenues would be significant if a settlement was paid, to the extent that it would dwarf the settlement figure and the legal fees you have quoted, combined. The damage to the BBC’s reputation in the IK would be catastrophic. I therefore believe that any BBC lawyer advising them to settle in these circumstances would be providing poor, uncommercial, two dimensional, and possibly even negligent advice. If you are paid the big bucks then sometimes you have to show a pair of bollocks in your client’s best interests. A legal professional who who strong-arms their client to settle in such circumstances is disgrace and an embarrassment imo.

The foregoing is based on the fact I have yet to see a cogent argument as to why this claim has any merit whatsoever, but if you have one then I’m all ears. Otherwise your view about settling in based on fear, not logic.

To advise your client to settle a claim that you believe has no merit, when it is contrary to their wider commercial interests to do so, is actually fucking spineless; it entails advising them to act contrary to their own best interests.

Litigants like Trump prey on the mental weakness of those against whom they litigate, as well as those who advise them.

Most of the time, settlement is the most sensible and practical approach, but in my view, for whatever that is worth, this isn’t one of them.

The claim is without merit and they should tell him to go fuck himself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top