Off Topic Politics Thread

My concern is that although there are no doubt genuine allegations this can so easily be used politically to just smear people. There are unscrupulous people who will use this just to try to damage a political party or person to achieve their own political aims.

 

Nor me, but I bet I've jokingly said that sort of thing many times in the workplace with no real loitering hoping that such an invite be accepted. Comment, shifty wink, didn't break stride though. That sort of thing being listed alongside rape and sexual assault is ridiculous. Fallon obvs has much more serious things which are going to break tomorrow though.

 

I think you'll find on both sides that these are internal fights and not external ones. This isn't Labour leaking on Tory and vice versa. It is people within the same party jumping on the issue to bolster their own chances. I would suggest even some of the serious cases coming to light are down to someone higher up wanting to utilise that case for advantage rather than much concern for the individual affected and in some cases I daresay that some junior wannabe with designs on being a future MP can see an opportunity.

Some in Labour are using it to try and takeout Corbyn's tribe and quite obviously in the Tory party it is a free for all at the moment. Last man standing style. None of them are looking great in there at the moment. Not the ones under suspicion nor the oh so saintly that are jumping on the grandstand.

 

What happened to the last "Teflon Don"?

Oh yeah, he's in gaol

You can only deny reality for so long; eventually it insists on making it's presence felt.

 

Please explain:

- What precisely was sold to Russian interests.
- What body made the decision to allow the sale.
- What has happened to the uranium since then.
- What Mueller's role was in the uranium sale.

 

Got to laugh at how the Queen has been caught out investing millions offshore to avoid tax, despite all her tax being voluntary because she's the Queen and is tax exempt.

She probably should have thought it through when she told her financial advisors to pay tax like a normal company!

 

Maybe the Paradise papers will open some eyes on some of the Democrat-Russian links!!!

 

I doubt she makes those investment decisions for herself. She just says to her advisors, "Pull me up a million quid old chap, one would like to purchase a new gold coach", and it is done, without old Betty giving a hoot where it comes from

 

You bloody pervert. The streets aren't safe with you around.

We were discussing this in the pub last night (raised by me as we'd lost and both scouse teams had won) and we decided we should all be very scared. Trying to cop off with a girl in the cornfield at the age of 9 is going to come back to bite me. Incidentally, Mrs May, this was more fun than running through one.

 

True, you keep thinking that lady Hillary is not a liar and a thief, the truth will come soon enough

 

The latest release late last week by Julian Assange at WikiLeaks of a 2009 State Department cable to the Russians raises fresh questions about the objectivity of Special Counsel Robert Mueller (shown), the man named to investigate any possible “collusions” between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and the Russians.
In 2009, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton directed FBI Director Mueller to deliver a sample of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Russia. The uranium had reportedly been stolen. It seems particularly odd, considering that the FBI is not under the supervision of the State Department, and that the FBI director would personally make the transfer.
Assange released the controversial cable on May 17, the same day that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped Mueller as an “independent” counsel to investigate any supposed Trump-Russian ties. The Uranium was never supposed to leave the US, yet some turned up in Canada ready for shipping. Why would the US sell 20%of their Uranium when they have to import more as they do not produce enough?

 

Your credibility took something of a hit when you told us during the US election that Clinton had left a trail of corpses, so I took thirty seconds off to fact check the news you've cut and pasted from a particularly addled and twisted website. Read this and let us know if it's credible.

https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-robert-mueller-uranium/

Vin

 

Collusion is enough for impeachment. It's a serious crime, as is obstruction of justice. See above post for the truth about Muellers 'involvement'.

As for the Trump investigation, it's taking a while partly because Trump sacked the initial investigator (Comey). Do you think investigations of alleged international corruption cases taking a while to come to court is unusual? It's only last week that the key to the whole thing, George Papadopoulos, was arrested.

{EDIT: Why is Papadopoulos important?


/EDIT}

Seriously, stop reading stuff on extreme right-wing websites. They make stuff up and twist the truth until it resembles lies. You really do seem to take it hook, line and sinker. Try thinking and fact-checking before accepting it as gospel. That's only my opinion, of course, so feel free to ignore the advice: I'm probably a deep-state plant.

Vin

 

And of course it is completely normal to pay someone half a million for "a speech."

 

Oh dear Bono

 

http://news.sky.com/story/paradise-...roduct-of-a-broken-global-tax-system-11116652

Interesting read about the Paradise papers and how we might be benefiting even though we don't realise it.

 

Nice read, shows why these places are tolerated and not pressured out of existence by the international community.
Also points out we need politics to keep progressing forward rather than backwards to finally get rid of them.

 

I can see a problem there. Seems not a lot has changed.

 

That's what the article was pointing out. The economy is progressing but politics isn't keeping pace. Or going backwards in some cases. Tax havens are a symptom of that.

 

I don't mean it like that. I think politics was keeping pace............in terms of selling "progression" while just finding ways to continue "business as usual."

The rules keep on evolving. We are constantly told that things are addressed but all that really happens is that they change the rules to move the problem somewhere else and continue as usual.

Like tax loopholes. When they close one they make sure they open another to compensate and thus nothing has really changed.

The media are just silly. They come out with this "shock horror" at this sort of stuff while the public think "no sh1t sherlock." The media act surprised. The public knew it was happening anyway.

Like the madman said to Hillary when pushed on his tax affairs......."you could have changed the rules." It's an honest answer and one that will continue to be an honest answer for a long long time.

Another media favourite "This is disgusting. Tax evasion, shock horror, this must be stopped."

"In other news, Corbyn is mad and is going to scare all the businesses away."

They go from disgusted to defending what they were disgusted by in the space of seconds within the same news broadcast.