President Trump

An excellent albeit sobering assessment of Russian influence over Trump and how it can be explained without him being an agent as such.



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
.
FFS you dont have to be an intelligence operative, nor even particularly intelligent, to see all that for yourself
 
...


I do agree this is the best thing to do; I expect TACO

But I can imagine lawyers advising otherwise and BBC going along with it
You may be right mate. And it is likely that extraneous forces will be brought to bear on any legal advice in any event.

I was simply responding to the legal advice point. If, as a legal professional and in your professional opinion there is no merit to a claim, then you need to clearly convey this to your client. It’s then up to them to make the commercial decision, even if that is contrary to your advice. As they are absolutely entitled to.

And I repeat, I am yet to see any cogent reason why this claim will ever amount to anything. Not one.

And that’s why I think the BBC would be mad to settle with the bullying ****.

If the BBC bows down, who’s next?
 
As the complainant is already lying about what the BBC did - "they put words in my mouth" - is there any legal principle in the US equivalent to the UK's "He who comes into equity must come with clean hands"?
 
Defamation actions involving public figures are virtually unwinnable in the US. Editing Trump's speech in the way the BBC did isn't great, but the jurisdictional issues are real and they would be crazy to settle.
 
Declares fentanyl a WMD and announces a land invasion of Venezuela whilst the Epstein files gets released in the background.
I wondered about it being a VZ precursor but normally you wouldn’t schedule such an address in advance. I am guessing it’s a “shore up my popularity” and “everything bad you’ve heard or will hear about me is a lie” speech.
 
I wondered about it being a VZ precursor but normally you wouldn’t schedule such an address in advance. I am guessing it’s a “shore up my popularity” and “everything bad you’ve heard or will hear about me is a lie” speech.
Economy is roaring, America is back, tractor production is strong and this year’s potato harvest is a record yield.
 
I wondered about it being a VZ precursor but normally you wouldn’t schedule such an address in advance. I am guessing it’s a “shore up my popularity” and “everything bad you’ve heard or will hear about me is a lie” speech.
We are at war with Venezuela: we have always been at war with Venezuela.
 
He might declare he’s ended the war with Venezuela, thus taking his wars ended tally up to an impressive 72. Or is it 73 now?
That sounds like a plan! Poke a metaphorical finger in somewhere, war ends but ensuring nothing can be permanent. War starts up again, he steps back in. Rinse and repeat. His peace plan for Ukraine sounds a lot like that. Could end up with several FIFA peace awards.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top