Jump to content
BANGKOK 16 January 2019 06:47

bristolboy

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    5,299
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6,339 Excellent

About bristolboy

  • Rank
    Titanium Member

Recent Profile Visitors

828 profile views
  1. Trump was such a great business that by the time he was five he was worth millions. And only got bailed out of bankruptcy by Daddy 4 times.
  2. And why couldn't the exact same argument be made on Pelosi and Schumer's behalf? Except of course they were willing to stay longer than the few minutes that Trump was able to endure.
  3. How about the Wall Street Journal? Owned by Rupert Murdoch. From its news pages: China’s Annual Trade Surplus With U.S. Hits Record Despite Trump’s Tariff Offensive China posted a trade surplus of $323.32 billion with the U.S. in 2018 https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-annual-trade-surplus-with-u-s-hits-record-despite-trumps-tariff-offensive-11547439977
  4. Wasn't it Trump who walked out of the last meeting?
  5. bristolboy

    SURVEY: Build the Wall -- Yes or No?

    Just took a look at Rasmussen which is more or less a pollster/shill for Republicans. Trump is underwater by 14 points. The last time he was that low was 10 months ago: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history
  6. You might want to look up Switzerland's relationship with the EU before you describe Switzerland as being a non-EU country. Do you think that the UK should have a similar relationship with the EU? Would that qualify as Brexit for you?
  7. What's strange to me is that all these small government conservatives in the UK condemn the pro-austerity EU for doing exactly what they want done in the UK. And do try to keep in mind that the UK is not in the Eurozone so those austerity measures don't constrain the UK one bit.
  8. bristolboy

    SURVEY: Build the Wall -- Yes or No?

    Trump headed the midterm elections by promoting fear of immigrants. How did that poll work out for him?
  9. Nice one. Insults are remainer tactics? And I guess in your mind "Still no need to resort to remainer 'insult' tactics." is not in itself an insult.
  10. "every post they make is insulting and condescending," This is why I refer to some Brexit supporters as dishonest.
  11. And let's not forget this 2nd meeting in Hamburg between Trump and Putin: The July 7 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, was the single most scrutinized of the Trump presidency. But it turned out there was another encounter: a one-on-one discussion over dinner that lasted as long as an hour and relied solely on a Kremlin-provided interpreter. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/18/world/europe/trump-putin-undisclosed-meeting.html
  12. False. The Washington Post’s Greg Miller reported Sunday that President Donald Trump’s confiscation of the translator’s notes from a one-on-one conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2017 was “unusual.” This is incorrect. It was unprecedented. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/trump-putin-meeting-no-note-taker.html Not only did Trump apparently confiscate the translator's notes, but he actually didn't bring in a 2nd note taker with him which is what is normally done. You would think that a chief executive would want detailed notes to make sure his side of what was said is recorded and also, to have detailed notes for review. Apparently if you've got a super-genius memory this is not necessary.
  13. To take last things first, executive privilege has nothing to do with Trump not disclosing or sharing the substance of his conversations with Putin. It is within his rights regardless of Executive Privilege. Behaving stupidly is also the right not just of Presidents but of every American. Not sharing with the relevant departments the substance and details of a summit meeting with an important adversarial nation is just plain stupid at best. How can they decide policy if they don't know what the President discussed and what his opposite number said? It show how bad things have gotten that stupidity is the best case that can be made for Trump's keeping the substance of his discussions secret even from relevant Cabinet officers.
  14. But it wasn't "off topic" when you responded to the post citing Saudi Arabia? Or is it only "off topic" when others do it?
  15. How about equating the deaths of thousands of US allies with the deaths of tens of thousand or perhaps hundreds of thouands, possibily millions of Yemenis?
×