Let's Suppose this is true, how does it relate to the discussion i was having with Seb and Flem?Trump has a long history of employing undocumented immigrant workers.
What Donald Trump Knew About Undocumented Workers at His Signature Tower
He has long denied knowingly using undocumented workers to demolish the building that would be replaced with Trump Towertime.com
So Trump Employs Undocumented Immigrants at His Properties and Nobody Really Cares?
That seems to be the state of affairs, this time after a report on his Virginia winery after some were fired.www.esquire.com
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Donald Trump
- Thread starter kaz7
- Start date
Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 17,018
Pfft that's nothing. Once I was next to Alastair Campbell in the security queue at London City Airport. He smelled like sandalwood and regret.
Why were you sniffing Alastair Campbell?
Go away“Black jobs” - that’s your issue. You don’t see why that comment annoyed so many you racist little twunt.
But weird stuff can happen on the golf course, it might be 67 million to one but it's possible. A golfer at my club was playing with his father many years ago, he had a hole in one, father tees it up and follows him in, what are the odds on that. There's a plaque on the hole to commemorate it.In effect, these are two holes-in-one.
The odds of making two in one round are 67 million to one. The odds of doing so consecutively, albeit with wedge, must be much, much higher. Speaking of a wedge, the average PGA Tour player hits his wedge 142 (carry distance). So what are the chances a 70+ year-old man can?
Utter horseshit. Laura and Trump are either lying or wrong.
I watched the Trump Dechambeau game on YouTube recently and Trump is a very good golfer.
So it isn't horseshit.
SkyBlueFlux
Well-Known Member
Why were you sniffing Alastair Campbell?
I wasn't sniffing him exactly, I was merely... 'experiencing his ether'.
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
Ha ha I’ve been the same golfer since I was 17 and never gotten better. But equipment has improved so I hit the ball farther than I did when I was skinny and young.You must be the most accomplished and most well connected poster all at the same time Ive ever read here. Surely youve worked on Wall St once with Phil Mickelson and he taught you how to do it, and once went to college with Obamas defence secretary whose lawyer took lessons off Butch Harmon who lived near to you and you all ended up in a 3 ball somewhere
But yes I’ve been very lucky. Have been given a lot. Spoiled rotten.
Last edited:
FogBlueInSanFran
Well-Known Member
The story is absolute horseshit. Someone has their facts wrong. Or is lying.But weird stuff can happen on the golf course, it might be 67 million to one but it's possible. A golfer at my club was playing with his father many years ago, he had a hole in one, father tees it up and follows him in, what are the odds on that. There's a plaque on the hole to commemorate it.
I watched the Trump Dechambeau game on YouTube recently and Trump is a very good golfer.
So it isn't horseshit.
The odds of two people making a hole in one in the same group on the same hole is 26 million to 1. Still far less than Trump’s “accomplishment.”
Of course Trump is a good player — he plays all the fucking time.
Mr Kobayashi
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Messages
- 17,018
“Black jobs” - that’s your issue. You don’t see why that comment annoyed so many you racist little twunt.
Dax isn't white.
1. Let's start here: I'm.not a yank. Yes, I'm an American Citizen. Coz I've been here a long time. Lagos born, Arusha raised to Nigerian Father and Brazilian mom from Bahia. My sense of Brits being Uppity didn't come from America. I thought that was obvious.
Its partly why I get a chuckle out of Bob's not too subtle insinuations that I'm a racist White guy from Alabama. For what it's worth, that's mighty uppity of him. I'd leave up to you to decide if the same applies to you.
2. Yes, you don't hear uppity much in the Motherland coz uppity is an derivative of Uppish. Which is the word that was more common prior to migrating to the new world.The word wasn't 'coined' in the 1880s. Just the earliest recorded use in writing was from then. But that's neither here nor there.
4. I said it was Ironic that Southern Whites used it. You retort with "how can slave owners be uppity? They are up." Again, I'll leave it up to you to decide whether there is irony here in light of your jab at American's supposed lack of... Knowledge?
You can have the last word on Uppity. But do us both a solid. Don't be presumptuous :)
FlemishDuck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2015
- Messages
- 1,785
As for the SCOTUS decision, there is nothing radical about it. I don't know whether it's because lors of the main stream media went haywire on their reporting, but I don't see anything radical about it.
What about it did you find scary?
You dont?
Since when does the Supreme court MAKE law???
Because there never was such a immunity law, its a contiguous (aka not unanimous, but arguably even "politically aligned") Supreme court ruling that finds precedent in a previous SC ruling that shielded Nixon in Nixon vs Fitzgerald.
I swear if this was Switzerland the people would have purged everyone involved in such a ridiculous ruling day 1. Political recall FTW.
Laws come from the people. In a direct democracy pretty much directly from the people, in a representative democracy you get a more elaborate process involving the house and the senate who have to go trough a lengthy process to get a law approved. All this process has a purpose.
Granted, just the way you "word" a law is pretty tricky business, especially knowing that a whole language can change pretty radically over a century. That makes it often unclear what people in the past meant with it, and for what purpose they envisioned the law, something afaik the also call "the spirit of the law".
So you have a Supreme court too, they get to look at these issues of interpretation as a body with "superior integrity" and "utter neutrality", they ought to understand the spirit and its past applications of the law in order rule when it comes to matters of interpretation.
What you here have is basically a rogue SC, it has corrupt members, its not politically neutral and it pretty much thinks it does not need the approval of the people (if need be trough their representatives) to reinterpret matters to such an extend that it comes down to making law.
And what does it rule? Well, something that would allow the functional rise of a murderous dictator president. It only needs to be "official", "official can even be kept "top secret", a president can now literally call for someone to get assassinated, kidnapped or jailed and pass it as a "top secret official act". Its not just that their reinterpretation would allow the president to do whatever he wants as long as he keeps it official, but also that he can make sure that it never sees the light of day and that investigation in it would not be even legal.
Picture making this referendum, how much of the people do you think would grant such immunity to a office that already has that much power? Maybe i should make a poll about it to test how many among the british people would vote for such a law in Britain here, i suspect i know how the result will trend.
That is my genuine impression of it, i gave it because you asked. You might have your opinion about it, but thats what it is imho. But i also find it surprising that from my perspective you seem to underestimate this so much. You know 20 years ago i used to often make a joke when gun law debates were on topic for what regards the US. I used to say that knowing Americans had enough private guns to arm pretty much every citizen from granny to baby and provide them with enough ammo to shoot the whole world population ... twice, that one thing they should really really try to avoid is having another civil war. That was a good joke back then because it wasnt something you would forsee happen back then. I dont make that joke anymore. I know to what extend the horrible rulings of the Supreme court even played a fair role in causing the American civil war, a period where it had many bad rulings too. Yeah i think its super scary, the more so given that even our national security kinda is quite connected to the stabillety of the US, or maybe also because just heck, your only the biggest nuclear power in the world..
Last edited:
laserblue
Well-Known Member
Look at the part of your post I highlighted in my response FFS.Let's Suppose this is true, how does it relate to the discussion i was having with Seb and Flem?