Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,288,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

Page 56 of 120 FirstFirst ... 646545556575866106 ... LastLast
Results 4,126 to 4,200 of 8926
  1. #4126
    What does poop even want "evidence" for? That the EU quotas are actually hurting fishermen? Here's as much googling as I can be bothered with.



    That's Sir Fucking Bob flicking the v's at Nigel Farage on the River Thames. Nigel was part of a protest fleet of fishermen who had sailed down from the North East to protest at EU quotas. Now why in the fuckity fuck would these fishermen go to all this trouble if they're not pissed off? And to be greeted by a rich mortherfucker with a fucking titled name, a corrupt piece of shit who made millions off famine, and his rich cunt buddies, challenging their democratic right to protest, daring to treat hard working people like they are the enemy, then maybe you can begin to understand why they voted "fuck off".

    For what it's worth, this single image might have swung the referendum.

    You guys seem to think this is a court of law. It's not. We're having a discussion. Poop challenged me with regards to the EU. He responded to my comment by patronising me about why the EU is good, as though he's an authority on the matter. He's since demonstrated that he believes it is "trade and labour", thus proving himself to be completely out of his depth. He needs to do his fucking research, or withdraw from such conversations. I will not spoon feed him. I'm not here to prove anything to anyone, I'm here to tell poop to respect my democratic dignity and that of 52% of the country. It is not his place to say it's not enough of a majority. We cannot keep voting on this issue until we get a 60/40. He's talking bollocks about a subject he knows fuck all about, and expects me to do his googling. Sorry but no.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  2. #4127
    And this idea that people have changed their mind. Have you any idea how many times I've made a bad mvoe in chess and want to take it back? Or the times I've raised when I wished I folded?

    You don't get to change your mind in such matters. That's not how it works. Be informed when you make your decision. I pretty much knew I was going to vote to leave, but that didn't stop me from researching. I had to be as sure as I could be that I wasn't making a mistake. And if right now I felt I had made a mistake, I wouldn't have the fucking neck to demand I get to change my mind.

    Honestly, I still don't know if I made a mistake by voting leave. But I'm more sure now than I was when I voted. I'll know for sure in a decade.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  3. #4128
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Brexit isn't some game. That seems pretty core to your argument. Comparing it to a game seems to dilute the differences between global politics and leisure activities.

    People do change their minds. Laws change to reflect public sentiment over time. All kinds of laws. Some as big of a deal as slavery. Some as little of a deal as tax rates on cakes.


    Sure.. we shouldn't set a precedent of having the voters vote on something, then politicians don't do it. We shouldn't set a precedent that voters vote one way, then politicians don't like it so they hold more votes until they get the vote they want. That's terrible, and you're right.

    However... this was a clusterfuck from the start. As I understand it, most of it was fallout from someone writing some lies on a bus and driving it around.
    Even the pro-Brexit politicians had no actual plan if the vote went in their favor. That pretty much tells me that even they didn't expect it to go their way, that they were bluffing.


    A lot of information has come to light in the past 3 years that was not known. The difficulty of striking any favorable deals as the UK leaves the EU must change the minds of people who originally voted thinking otherwise. 3 years of stalled movement with no compromises is enough to pull over to the side of the road and make sure you've got the right map, and that you're heading the right direction.


    I've no vested interest in this. Whether or not you /should/ take another vote or press on with the last one is not for me to say. It just strikes me that there is a compelling argument to be made that this is not a scam, that the first vote was the scam, and the constituency is far more informed now than they were back when.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  4. #4129
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is why discussing things with you is pointless. You got asked for evidence that the EU was definitely hurting fishermen's livelihood and you respond with a picture of Bob Geldof and a big rant. Like that proves anything.

    Even assuming these fishermen were so angry about quotas that they organized a protest in London with Farage doesn't itself prove the EU hurt them. The protest only (assuming it's actually true and you have the details straight, which is a big 'if' about anything you claim since you never seem to consider providing any hard evidence) shows they THINK the EU is bad for them. It's kind of like saying the Nazi rallies at Nuremberg proved that Jews were bad for Germany because wow look at all those people.
  5. #4130
    I mean obviously you can't boil down the + and - of membership in the EU into a simple number. But you can do better than just say 'look at these angry people' and 'omfg i don't get a takeback in chess why should the UK get a takeback in whether it's in the EU or not?'

    So simplifying the problem by saying let's look at fishermens' livelihoods (not that they're somehow more important than anyone else in the UK, but just to narrow the issue a bit) is one place to start. Are they better or worse off under the EU? If all you can offer is 'it seems a lot of them think not' that's not evidence for reasons I've already explained. There may be other factors at play in their livelihoods than EU fishing quotas like depleted stocks (which, as I understand it, is the main purpose of having a quota in the first place, so the next generation can still have something to fish). What they believe is irrelevant to what the facts are. People believe all kinds of stupid things, sometimes en masse.

    So you'll have to do better than that, sorry.
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 04-17-2019 at 03:51 PM.
  6. #4131
    Brexit isn't some game.
    No, but democratic actions are not something you can simply change your mind about shortly afterwards.

    Sure.. we shouldn't set a precedent of having the voters vote on something, then politicians don't do it. We shouldn't set a precedent that voters vote one way, then politicians don't like it so they hold more votes until they get the vote they want. That's terrible, and you're right.
    We also shouldn't set a precedent that 52/48 is not a a majority. We also shouldn't set a precedent that we have repeat votes for the benefit of people who may have changed their mind. It's a simple case of "tough shit". I think the American way of saying that is "deal with it".

    You want a better analogy, how about changing your mind about nailing that blonde piece after your wife finds out. It's a bit late.

    However... this was a clusterfuck from the start. As I understand it, most of it was fallout from someone writing some lies on a bus and driving it around.
    This is ridiculous. Brexit happened because there was a social appetite for it.

    Even the pro-Brexit politicians had no actual plan if the vote went in their favor. That pretty much tells me that even they didn't expect it to go their way, that they were bluffing.
    I don't doubt some were. Others would argue the plan is simply to leave and adapt, take the initial hardship while rebuilding our economy for the better. We used to be the world's largest economy, we started the industrial revolution. Now 80% of our GDP comes from the services sector. We're a nation of bankers and retail assistants. Very few people now work in agriculture or industry. We make fuck all. That needs to change. We need to create British products that people around the world want to buy. Like cars, to throw out one example. Some would call that a plan.

    A lot of information has come to light in the past 3 years that was not known. The difficulty of striking any favorable deals as the UK leaves the EU must change the minds of people who originally voted thinking otherwise.
    This is nonsense. Everyone who voted leave expect the Europeans to be bloody difficult. And everyone also knew that it was impossible for us to negotiate trade deals with other countries until we had actually left. So we all expected a clusterfuck of uncertainty. It's the price we were willing to pay.

    To the minority of people who naively thought it would be easy and now regret their choice, tough shit., You don't get to change your mind because you weren't informed when you voted.

    It just strikes me that there is a compelling argument to be made that this is not a scam, that the first vote was the scam, and the constituency is far more informed now than they were back when.
    The first vote wasn't a scam. Do you want to remain in the EU or leave? There isn't a "wait to see what happens and then make a decision". There's obviously new information that comes to light. That works both ways. What if we vote to remain, and then they start building an army? We vote again? We can't keep doing this, how is that not obvious?

    If there's still appetite for it in a decade, maybe.But for now, we have made our choice, and we must follow it through to completion. Only after we have adapted (or not) can we know if we made a mistake. Maybe then we can vote again.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  7. #4132
    Quote Originally Posted by poop
    not that they're somehow more important than anyone else in the UK, but just to narrow the issue a bit
    I'm sorry if I give more of a fuck about a fisherman who risks his life to feed his family and the nation than I do about a banker who gets a bonus for fucking the economy. And it's not just jobs. It's entire communities that suffer. Go to Grimsby, and fishing is what it's all about. There's basically fuck all else in Grimsby. If fishing suffers, the town suffers. That happens all around the coast. When fishing is suffering because the Dutch are fishing British waters, there's a problem. And the problem isn't the Dutch. It's the agreement that allows it to happen.

    (which, as I understand it, is the main purpose of having a quota in the first place, so the next generation can still have something to fish)
    Partly, but we've been fishing sustainably for a very long time. We don't need sustainability quotas imposed on us from others. But that isn't what these quotas are about. At the time of the vote, the Dutch were fishing these waters. So it's not like it was a matter of sustainability.

    So you'll have to do better than that, sorry.
    You need to do better. You once again show you're out of your depth by suggesting these quotas are about sustainability. You think it's the leave campaign that is misinformed, while blinded to your own ignorance.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  8. #4133
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm sorry if I give more of a fuck about a fisherman who risks his life to feed his family and the nation than I do about a banker who gets a bonus for fucking the economy.
    Well if we're dividing up the population in terms of who is most important, then that doesn't sound like democracy to me.

    Further, what about the firemen who risk their lives to save some div who leaves the oven on and sets their houses on fire? Should they have to pay more for everything and have a worse standard of living so you can get local made fish and chips?


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    And it's not just jobs. It's entire communities that suffer. Go to Grimsby, and fishing is what it's all about. There's basically fuck all else in Grimsby. If fishing suffers, the town suffers. That happens all around the coast.
    Again, you've presented no evidence the decline in the fishing economies is due to the EU.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    When fishing is suffering because the Dutch are fishing British waters, there's a problem. And the problem isn't the Dutch. It's the agreement that allows it to happen.

    Partly, but we've been fishing sustainably for a very long time. We don't need sustainability quotas imposed on us from others. But that isn't what these quotas are about. At the time of the vote, the Dutch were fishing these waters. So it's not like it was a matter of sustainability.

    Oh there's more to the story. It was the Dutch fishing in UK waters that caused Grimsby (and by proxy NE England) to vote Leave, is that it now?

    Your talent for oversimplification to suit your whims is astounding.




    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You need to do better. You once again show you're out of your depth by suggesting these quotas are about sustainability. You think it's the leave campaign that is misinformed, while blinded to your own ignorance.
    You think the quotas are there so the Dutch fishermen can prosper at the expense of the UK. That's what funny about you suggesting I'm out of my depth. Your arguments don't even pass the laugh test. I guess that's why you can't be bothered to provide evidence.
  9. #4134
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post

    You want a better analogy, how about changing your mind about nailing that blonde piece after your wife finds out. It's a bit late.
    This is weak sauce, comparing a referendum to adultery. What a reach.

    How about an analogy being you ask 100 people in your neighborhood if they want some deal and 52 say yes. You tell them ahead of time it's not a legally binding vote. Later information comes in that makes the deal look worse than it did when they voted. Are you going to say 'well fuck it 52% of us wanted it, so let's go ahead anyways regardless of whether it's now 40% now that more is known about the deal'? Seems kinda dumb.
  10. #4135
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I don't doubt some were. Others would argue the plan is simply to leave and adapt, take the initial hardship while rebuilding our economy for the better. We used to be the world's largest economy, we started the industrial revolution. Now 80% of our GDP comes from the services sector. We're a nation of bankers and retail assistants. Very few people now work in agriculture or industry. We make fuck all. That needs to change. We need to create British products that people around the world want to buy. Like cars, to throw out one example. Some would call that a plan.
    What a delusional argument this is. Not only is this an unrealistic plan, there's no reason to think Brexit would help it become a reality. We're not going to lead the world's economy anymore, get over it. Learn Mandarin and deal with the fact that times change.
  11. #4136
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    What if we vote to remain, and then they start building an army?
    Lol, such a paranoid fantasy that we're going to lose our sovereignty because we're in the EU.
  12. #4137
    Well,there's a fucking surprise.

    https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-pinching-our-fish/

    The UK’s share of the overall EU fishing catch grew between 2004 and 2014. In 2004 the UK had the fourth largest catch of any EU country at 652,000 tonnes, by 2014 this had grown to 752,000 tonnes and the second largest catch of any country in the EU.
    And another:

    Total Allowable Catches are intended to ensure that fishing is sustainable within each fishing zone and that the areas are not overfished. There are doubts within the industry as to whether or not the EU’s fishing policy has actually achieved this. But, some species, such as North Sea cod, seem to be recovering and an assessment is underway to determine whether or not it is now sustainable.
    Shock/horror

    If we left the EU it wouldn’t necessarily mean that the situation would improve. The House of Commons Library has said that “many of the underlying issues that affect fisheries management would remain unchanged.”
  13. #4138
    Yeah, no misinformation campaign there

    https://fullfact.org/europe/vote-lea...acts-leaflets/
  14. #4139
    I don't know about you, but I'd be happy to be £850-1700/yr poorer just to save me from being drafted into the Imperial European Army.

    https://fullfact.org/europe/stronger...aflet-leaving/
  15. #4140
    So I heard the cost to rebuild NDC is going to be $1bn. Yes, one billion fucking dollars. And the plan is to do it. Is it just me or are there better things to spend a billion on?
  16. #4141
    The UK’s share of the overall EU fishing catch grew between 2004 and 2014. In 2004 the UK had the fourth largest catch of any EU country at 652,000 tonnes, by 2014 this had grown to 752,000 tonnes and the second largest catch of any country in the EU.
    Oh, so British fishing isn't in decline? Great news. Problem solved. Point to random figures off some random site, and ignore actual fishermen who were protesting as we built up to the referendum.

    I'm literally going to bed. I'll give those figures the benefit of the doubt for now and dig tomorrow, What I'd ask now is this... how much of the EU's marine territory is British? How much is our share relative to this figure? If we cut loose, will our fishing haul go up, or down? Then you can tell me if there's anything to be gained for the fishing industry in the UK by leaving the EU.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  17. #4142
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Point to random figures off some random site
    Are you saying they just made those up? Not impossible but then what are the real figures?


    This quote is from the House of Commons Library.

    If we left the EU it wouldn’t necessarily mean that the situation would improve. The House of Commons Library has said that “many of the underlying issues that affect fisheries management would remain unchanged.”
    Makes me wonder what some of those underlying issues are. Obviously it's not as simple as 'they're stealing our fish'.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    and ignore actual fishermen who were protesting as we built up to the referendum.
    Like I said, you don't have to be right to be a protester.


    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    If we cut loose, will our fishing haul go up, or down? Then you can tell me if there's anything to be gained for the fishing industry in the UK by leaving the EU.
    Another question might be who will buy our fish with a 20% tariff?
  18. #4143
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,669
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Overfishing is a thing
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  19. #4144
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    I know it's bad how much I look at T_D, you don't need to tell me, but just look at this shit:



    ... endless comedy!
    to be fair, this is an awful headline that can easily be read either way. If you read it with a coma after "measure", it means what they think it means.
  20. #4145
    Are you saying they just made those up? Not impossible but then what are the real figures?
    I'm not saying it's made up any more than you're saying these fishermen are liars. If fishing is going up, then it's not in decline, and there's no problem.So why is fishing in decline, and why do we have a problem?

    Another question might be who will buy our fish with a 20% tariff?
    British people. We eat a lot of fish.

    If we left the EU it wouldn’t necessarily mean that the situation would improve.
    I don't think anyone pretends to be certain things will improve. How can anyone know? People are just willing to take the risk. 52% of people, in fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  21. #4146
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I'm not saying it's made up any more than you're saying these fishermen are liars. If fishing is going up, then it's not in decline, and there's no problem.So why is fishing in decline, and why do we have a problem?
    Overfishing is the simplest explanation. see link posted by jack.





    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    British people. We eat a lot of fish.
    People don't suddenly start stuffing themselves with certain foods because their country can no longer export it due to tariffs. They might eat more if the price goes down (a price drop which is bad for fishermen) due to lack of trade, but in aggregate that won't make the fishermen better off. Catch more fish and sell it cheaper is not a solution.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I don't think anyone pretends to be certain things will improve.
    Certain enough to support Brexit though, that's the problem.

    Here's some idea of how complicated the single issue of fishing is re: Brexit. Best case scenario is we get a trade deal similar to one we have now, which seems pretty unlikely given we'd be giving them two fingers up. Worst is we get treated like every other riff raff country. How many of those well-informed protesters and/or Leavers read this report I wonder (or an analogous report, assuming one exists, for NE England)? Of the ones who did, how many had the level of intelligence/training to understand it? It's pretty dense and complicated.

    https://www.gov.scot/publications/ec...-exit/pages/6/
    Last edited by Poopadoop; 04-18-2019 at 04:01 AM.
  22. #4147
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer View Post
    Overfishing is a thing
    Says Greenpeace? That's rather like NATO telling us Russia is a threat. Whatever it takes to get a large budget.

    Overfishing is a thing, but we're not engaged with such activities. We've been sustainably fishing for a long, long time. Don't get me wrong, we've had our problems over the years, like 3 "Cod wars" with Iceland, which ultimately they won. That was the beginning of fishing decline in the UK. We had to conceded large swathes of marine territory because Iceland threatened to pull out of NATO. Did we start overfishing the waters we can fish? No, because we're not stupid.

    We don't need to be partonised about such issues, not least from fucking Greenpeace. I note the words "UK", "Britain" and "England" are not part of the article which admittedly I didn't read.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  23. #4148
    Well, that's interesting. They don't like the quotas but they like the free trade. Sounds like they want to have their cake and eat it too.

    https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/n...seafood-736984
  24. #4149
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I note the words "UK", "Britain" and "England" are not part of the article which admittedly I didn't read.
    Do you see it in this article?

    https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp...r-overfishing/
  25. #4150
    This whole nostalgia for fishing in Grimsby strikes me as similar to the nostalgia for the glory days of coal in West Virginia. While I'm sympathetic to people losing employment opportunities because times have changed and missing the good old days, they have to understand that we can't just turn back the clock and make everything better. They might have to go find something else to do.
  26. #4151
    This whole nostalgia for fishing in Grimsby strikes me as similar to the nostalgia for the glory days of coal in West Virginia.
    Nostalgia? That's an interesting word to describe people's livelihoods. Yes it's reasonable to compare it to mining... Thatcher closed the mines and then started buying coal from abroad, destroying communities across the country.

    This isn't about "good old days", it's about entire communities suffering thanks to globalism. If you're a globalist and don't have a problem with it, fair enough, I'm not telling you how you should think economically. But you should still respect people's democratic dignity, you should still understand why communities suffer and why they have a problem with it. If suddenly you were unable to work because someone decided to buy whatever you make or get whatever service you provide from elsewhere without a care about your personal circumstances, if suddenly you couldn't support your family, you'd be pissed off. If you felt leaving the EU would make things better, then you wouldn't be arguing with me about why the EU is so bloody marvelous.

    While I'm sympathetic to people losing employment opportunities because times have changed and missing the good old days, they have to understand that we can't just turn back the clock and make everything better. They might have to go find something else to do.
    Grismbsy is an absolute shithole. There is nothing there except for fishing. If fishing is done, so is Grimsby. And it's hardly the only fishing community, I refer to this town because it's somewhere I've been, I know how important fishing is to this town.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  27. #4152
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    A think-tank has placed the UK at the top of an international league table of overfishing.
    I read that and couldn't be bothered any more. A think tank? Utter bollocks. We've been fishing for centuries. I also noted Scottish Fishing has something to say about it. The Scottish want to remain in the EU, so naturally they jump on anything that supports their case.

    And this is still besides the point. If this is about sustainability, then nobody should be fishing those waters. That isn't what's happening, or at least it wasn't when we voted. I actually don't know what's going on there now, I haven't researched this in depth since the vote.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  28. #4153
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Grismbsy is an absolute shithole. There is nothing there except for fishing. If fishing is done, so is Grimsby. And it's hardly the only fishing community, I refer to this town because it's somewhere I've been, I know how important fishing is to this town.
    There's towns all over the world that time has passed by. They're called ghost towns.
  29. #4154
    I missed your post above when I replied to Jack, I was about to go out.

    Overfishing is the simplest explanation. see link posted by jack.
    Overfishing is not the reason why you allow somebody else to fish particular waters. That doesn't make sense.

    People don't suddenly start stuffing themselves with certain foods because their country can no longer export it due to tariffs.
    We eat a lot of fish. I don't know how much we export, and who to, but tariffs are something we can negotiate after we leave. Maybe New Zealand will buy our fish and we'll buy their lamb. I have no idea, that's for when we actually leave. That's not a choice we made, we literally cannot negotiate these things until we leave.

    Certain enough to support Brexit though, that's the problem.
    You're the one who thinks leaving the EU is a problem. I don't. I agree it's a clusterfuck, but it's not a problem until it is clear that we are worse off. That won't be clear for a long time, there are still many obstacles to overcome, such as trade deals with other countries.

    Best case scenario is we get a trade deal similar to one we have now, which seems pretty unlikely given we'd be giving them two fingers up. Worst is we get treated like every other riff raff country.
    Your focus here is the EU. That's your problem, it's like you think they're the only people we can trade with. If we get a similar trade deal while not being politically integrated into their superstate, that's great,perhaps even optimal. If they treat us like riff-raff, fuck them. Hello USA, hello New Zealand and Australia, hello China.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  30. #4155
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    There's towns all over the world that time has passed by. They're called ghost towns.
    This is not something we should simply allow to happen.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  31. #4156
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    This is not something we should simply allow to happen.
    Why? Why are you attached to the old ways so much even when they're no longer viable?

    When they discover gold or silver or some other mineral in some place and then the mineral runs out, they don't go 'oh fuck we better find a way to prop these miners up, else what will they do?' They say 'there's no more work here, get a different job'

    Why I should be most likely £1000 poorer every year so some fisherman I've never met may or may not (more likely not) be able to continue scraping by in an industry that's dying because their predecessors overfished the waters they want to fish in, and they're too stupid to admit it and so they blame it on being in an economic union that benefits the whole country? Fuck off.
  32. #4157
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Your focus here is the EU. That's your problem, it's like you think they're the only people we can trade with. If we get a similar trade deal while not being politically integrated into their superstate, that's great,perhaps even optimal. If they treat us like riff-raff, fuck them. Hello USA, hello New Zealand and Australia, hello China.
    Yeah I'm sure all these countries are just hoping we'll leave the EU so they can have our fish all to themselves. You think the moment we lose one market we gain another? It doesn't work that way.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...-imported.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/environm...theres-a-catch


    They're unlikely to give us a good deal if we leave the EU. They won't even give Norway a good deal and it's in the EEA.

    Also, the actual source I cited took into account our ability to trade with other countries. It's not like they're fucking clueless . If you actually scanned over the report you'd realise they know more about it than you or me.

    And oh yea, the fishing industry isn't just about some hardasses on a boat. There's also processing, which is heavily invested in the EU.

    https://publications.parliament.uk/p...om/78/7811.htm
  33. #4158
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    We eat a lot of fish. I don't know how much we export, and who to, but tariffs are something we can negotiate after we leave.
    I've learned more in a half hour of scanning links than you ever knew about the whole question.

    Glad you've done the research to back up your opinion.

    What exactly are your reasons for backing Brexit? I mean specifically, not just vague things about 'fishermen protesting' and 'superstate' and 'imperial army' shit. What good do you expect to come from it?
  34. #4159
    Looks like I'm not the only one who's learned a few things since 2016.

    https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/n...inster-2312213
  35. #4160
    Why? Why are you attached to the old ways so much even when they're no longer viable?
    Who says it's no longer viable? You? The EU? Certainly the people of Grimsby aren't saying that fishing is no longer a viable economy.

    This isn't about "old ways". We eat fish, we sell fish to export markets. Why isn't it viable? I don't see how you're qualified to make this determination.

    When they discover gold or silver...
    Gold and silver do not reproduce. At least mining isn't sustainable, I do understand that difference between mining and fishing.

    Why I should be most likely £1000 poorer every year so some fisherman I've never met may or may not (more likely not) be able to continue scraping by in an industry that's dying because their predecessors overfished the waters they want to fish in,
    THIS ISN'T ABOUT OVERFISHING, THE DUTCH WERE FISHING THE WATERS, THAT WAS THE PROBLEM.

    Besides, even if overfishing is a problem, then the solution isn't to stop altogether, it's to impose quotas... sustainability quotas... until stocks have replenished.

    Your argument is selfish, too. Why should a town become a ghost town so you can (maybe) earn £1K a year more? If you lost £1k a year income, does that threaten you, your family, and your entire community? No it fucking doesn't. And I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here that you will indeed be worse off. I don't know how you can know this, it will take years before you can know. Maybe you'll be £1k worse off next three years, then £2K better off the next three. Neither of us know. What matters is a democratic decision has been made, so we'll find out in time.

    and they're too stupid to admit it and so they blame it on being in an economic union that benefits the whole country? Fuck off.
    This is MASSIVELY insulting, not to me, but to people who fish for a living. It's one of the most dangerous careers in this country, they literally risk their lives to feed their families. To call them "stupid" for assuming the EU quotas are hurting them, which they quite obviously are. It's astonishing you want proof that allowing the Dutch to fish British waters is hurting the local economy. They fish for a living and they are unable to fish waters they used to be allowed to fish. Use your fucking brain.

    You are making an assumption that the EU benefits the whole country. That is highly debatable.I'm not calling you stupid for thinking the EU is good, I'm telling you that to call people stupid for disagreeing with you is arrogant as fuck, especially coming from someone who migrated here for economic reasons. How would you feel if Canadian fishing was being fucked by USA fishing their waters? How about if these Canadian fishermen were your brothers and cousins?

    Yeah I'm sure all these countries are just hoping we'll leave the EU so they can have our fish all to themselves. You think the moment we lose one market we gain another? It doesn't work that way.
    Neither of us know this. But I am confident there are nations out there who can't wait to trade with us. It's obviously not just about fish, is it?

    They're unlikely to give us a good deal if we leave the EU.
    I don't expect a good deal from them, never did expect it. Hoped, perhaps, but I didn't vote leave expecting it.

    Also, the actual source I cited took into account our ability to trade with other countries. It's not like they're fucking clueless . If you actually scanned over the report you'd realise they know more about it than you or me.
    Nobody knows who we can deal with and at what cost post EU, so nobody is in any position to know if we will be better off or not. We can't know until we either succeed or fail in negotiating trade deals with other countries, and those negotiations cannot happen (at least overtly) until we leave.

    And oh yea, the fishing industry isn't just about some hardasses on a boat. There's also processing, which is heavily invested in the EU.
    So? We can process fish. We don't need the EU to do it for us.

    I've learned more in a half hour of scanning links than you ever knew about the whole question.
    No, you cherry picked what you respond to while ignoring things like "we cannot negotiate trade deal until we leave".

    What exactly are your reasons for backing Brexit? I mean specifically, not just vague things about 'fishermen protesting' and 'superstate' and 'imperial army' shit. What good do you expect to come from it?
    "Superstate" is not shit, it is what the EU is. If you read my posts, you would see I have answered this question already... culture, community, and above all else, independence.

    What good do I expect to come out of it? Our economy adapts to one that exports more than we import. For that to happen, we need to start making things again that the rest of the world wants to buy. We also reclaim our ability to create our own laws, reflecting British values and protecting British sovereignty.

    Looks like I'm not the only one who's learned a few things since 2016.
    Oh marvelous, a poll citing 2% of Grimsby's population. And we all know how reliable polls are.

    You've learned fuck all, because you're still talking about the EU as though it's trade and labour while dismissing concerns about political integration, while calling hard working people "stupid" for daring to disagree with you. You're no better than Bob Geldof when you say things like that.
    Last edited by OngBonga; 04-18-2019 at 10:51 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  36. #4161
    If you can't accept the basic, well-agreed on fact that overfishing has been a major factor in the decline in fishing industry then you're a lost cause. it's not a case of 'hurr durr they're stealing our fish' ffs. I'd provide you with some (more) evidence but obviously you're not interested in facts.

    And stop with the whole 'fishermen are heroes' whining. No-one is forcing them to do that for a living, or saying that they can't possibly get another job ever.

    And yeah too bad the poll agrees with me, even the people in Grimsby.
  37. #4162
    You're no better than Bob Geldof when you say things like that.
    I apologise for this insult. No matter how arrogant you come across right now, I doubt very much you'd happily make millions off famine. This was below the belt.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  38. #4163
    If you can't accept the basic, well-agreed on fact that overfishing has been a major factor in the decline in fishing industry then you're a lost cause.
    It might be, but it's compeltely besides the point. EU quotas allow other people to fish the waters. So the EU agree that there is enough fish in these waters for viable economic activity. These are British waters, the economic activity should be British, or foreign at our invitation. Now we did invite such activity... by joining the EEC. Now we've changed our mind... decades after we joined, not a couple of fucking years.

    Overfishing is not what this is about. That doesn't kill the fishing industry. It hurts it, sure, but it's not what these people are complaining about. You continue to demonstrate your ignorance on this topic.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  39. #4164
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    You continue to demonstrate your ignorance on this topic.
    Coming from the guy who doesn't need evidence to support his claims and won't even look at any that disagrees with them, this is pretty rich.
  40. #4165
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Coming from the guy who did his research when it mattered and can't be bothered to now, this is pretty rich.
    fyp
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  41. #4166
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I did my "research" like I always do (half -assed), gathered some half-truths, and can't find any of my sources when challenged on it.
    fyp
  42. #4167
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    FWIW, the combine harvester already took all our jobs, changed the food supply chain such that only a small number of people were making any money off of what is now "big farming." 80% of humans were farmers before that machine was around. Now it's closer to 5 - 10% in countries where combine harvesters are available (they cost over $250k, so not accessible to poor farmers).

    This talk about the fishing community losing their jobs... I mean... it's harsh in the short term, but in the long term, it's just like all those farming communities that went bust. Times change. The localization of labor changes.
    This is at the core of ong's argument, so I'm confused why he'd to point to a short-term harsh adjustment as a negative. If the fishing industry doesn't support the scale at which Grimsby has become accustomed, then Griimsby needs to adjust and re-accustom itself to the changing times. The short-term adjustment as Grimsby moves away from being a fishing community is just the path of human progress.

    The mere argument that a community is losing its industry is not necessarily a sign that the industry should be saved.

    Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Context matters.

    If the issue is foreign fishers fishing the waters, so that UK fishers can't fish the amount of fish they could fish, which the market supports, then that's in line with ong's argument.
    If the foreign fishing issue is a red herring (lol), as the quote from the House of FancyPants that Poopy shared indicates, then Grimsby is understandably upset that their industry is failing, but it's nothing to do with the EU or Brexit... it's just a changing world. Sorry Grimsby, but if you're clawing onto a failing industry that doesn't support the scale at which you've historically had it run, then that's on you to adjust your industry, create or invent new jobs and find prosperity in a new way.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  43. #4168
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    fyp
    I clearly have done more research than you have. You still insist overfishing is the cause of their problems, and you still insist that political integration concerns are baseless. You've stopped responding to me point by point because you can't keep cherry picking. Meanwhile, I respond to everything you post. Well, except the obvious attempts to bait me. I do ignore one or two things, but generally I have a response to anything. That should demonstrate to you that I have indeed done my research. Am I right? Fuck knows, I'm not an expert. I'm a voter who has a single vote, and exercised my democratic right.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  44. #4169
    mojo, what's the fishing equivalent of the combine harvester?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  45. #4170
    And mojo, you do understand that if the Dutch are fishing British waters, there is enough fish there for economic activity, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  46. #4171
    "Very worried of course about Brexit," says Barend Hakvoort, whose job it is to ensure the Netherlands' largest fish auction house maintains its stocks.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46361999
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  47. #4172
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    It's Mueller timer!

    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  48. #4173
    It's obviously quite complicated as you can see from the links I posted, and not simply a matter of the EU stealing our fish. There's quotas on fish (agreed to by the UK fwiw) for the purpose of sustainability. These aren't unique to the EU but also involve global agreements because of overfishing.

    There's also agreements about where different nations can fish; it's not that the Dutch suddenly got given access to UK waters and now they're getting rich off our back, they've historically been in those waters all along.

    There's also, as pointed out, historical factors at play that mean that laborer jobs aren't able to sustain the relative standard of living they used to be able to. People don't want to work in shitty pay dangerous jobs when they have better opportunities elsewhere.

    Again, I sympathize with these people, I'm sorry if they're suffering. I just don't feel like I should take it on the chin for something that may or probably won't help them.
  49. #4174
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Actually a surprising amount is not redacted. As far as I can tell by now, Trump is fucked once he's out of office but until then he's untouchable on obstruction. - Ordered the DOJ to fire Mueller. That's probably going to be the big one, but I'm only a couple pages in.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...m_npd_nn_tw_ma
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  50. #4175
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    HOW ARE YOU GUYS STILL TALKING ABOUT FISH?!
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  51. #4176
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Suddenly now you trust the BBC lol.
  52. #4177
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Ordered the DOJ to fire Mueller. [/url]
    Whooaaaaaa! Back up! Beep! Beep! Beep!
  53. #4178
    There's quotas on fish (agreed to by the UK fwiw) for the purpose of sustainability.
    I don't know how many times I have to keep saying this, but I'll try one more time.

    Sustainability quotas are not the problem.

    There's also agreements about where different nations can fish; it's not that the Dutch suddenly got given access to UK waters and now they're getting rich off our back, they've historically been in those waters all along.
    We actually have a strong relationship with the Dutch. I am certainly not anti-Dutch, I recognise their legal right to fish these waters. When we reclaim our waters, it's not out of the question that we continue to work with the Dutch with regards to fishing. But it has to be our choice, and to our mutual benefit, not just theirs.

    People don't want to work in shitty pay dangerous jobs when they have better opportunities elsewhere.
    They don't? You can speak on their behalf, can you? Why are they pissed off then? Why aren't they seeing the decline of the fishing industry as an opportunity?

    You're wrong. People would rather do what their ancestors have done for centuries than go and work for Tesco for the same shitty pay, even if it's less dangerous.

    Again, I sympathize with these people,
    Don't lie. You called them stupid. Stand by your convictions. You have no respect for them, you think they are stupid and their job is shitty, you think you can speak on their behalf. You can say you sympathise with them, but your comments prove otherwise. You have no respect for their democratic dignity and think you can speak on the behalf when it comes to such matters.

    I just don't feel like I should take it on the chin for something that may or probably won't help them.
    Here's the difference between our positions on the EU... your position is about you, mine is not.

    Suddenly now you trust the BBC lol.
    Trust? No. But that at least demonstrates to mojo that the Dutch are indeed fishing our waters, and that us leaving the EU will potentially change that. I don't trust any MSM source, which is why I can't be fucked to provide link after link "proving" my position.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  54. #4179
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    HOW ARE YOU GUYS STILL TALKING ABOUT FISH?!
    You're right, it's like talking to a brick wall with a trace of banana dna
  55. #4180
    oskar,it's not about fish, it's about democracy and poop's absolute disregard for it. It's also about his misinformed opinion on what the EU is, and his "sympathy" for people he thinks are too stupid to speak for themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  56. #4181
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    You guys play nice, I have a report to read.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  57. #4182
    Yaya, this is the MAGA thread. If you want to make up shit with no facts to back you up maybe start a 'Brexit Friends of Democracy and Brave Fishermen Who've Done Research They Can't Cite" thread.
  58. #4183
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    You guys play nice, I have a report to read.
    Tell us the juicy bits.
  59. #4184
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    VOX is reading the entire thing.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G73iRRgoLKg

    They're currently at page 90. Almost everything so far already was public knowledge except some very specific communications between Cohen and a Giorgi Rtskhiladze. It's on page 78 of the pdf.

    The story so far is: an insane amount of evidence that russians tried to get in contact with the trump campaign clearly stating that they want to help trump become president. Basically... Trump campaign sought to collude. Russians sought to collude, but they found no collusion because apparently for it to be collusion they have to sign a collusion agreement or something along those lines. Lets remember that the 18 angry democrats (used to be 13) are mostly republicans, so there's that.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  60. #4185
    Huh. Well none of that's surprising really. Kinda fits the narrative so far.

    Didn't know collusion required a signed agreement though. That's some legal wizardy the mob would be proud of
  61. #4186
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Collusion is not a crime on any level, so there's no reason to prove it.

    It's a misdirection.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  62. #4187
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,630
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    mojo, what's the fishing equivalent of the combine harvester?
    Nothing compares to the CH on this level. It's the single most life-changing invention of humans to date.
    It took the jobs of over 60% of almost all humans.

    My point was that no matter what's happening in the fishing industry, the decline alone isn't indicative of the need to step in. Industries change for all kinds of reasons.

    If the fishermen are hurting, that's a fact on the ground we can work with. What's their proposed change? That seems to go against what their politicians say will happen if they get what they're protesting for... so something's not in line.

    If what they're asking for wont change their problem, then there's a good reason to not put much weight in what they're asking for.

    I'm just pointing out that both of you can be right on this issue... The fishermen are hurting and want Brexit to alleviate their hurt. AND Politicians know that whatever happens with Brexit isn't going to affect the change the fishermen want.
    They're not mutually exclusive.

    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    And mojo, you do understand that if the Dutch are fishing British waters, there is enough fish there for economic activity, right?
    In Holland, yeah. Doesn't speak to there being a market in the UK, though.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  63. #4188
    Nothing compares to the CH on this level.
    I agree, which was the point I was hinting at.

    My point was that no matter what's happening in the fishing industry, the decline alone isn't indicative of the need to step in. Industries change for all kinds of reasons.
    Yes they do. Some reasons are acceptable and inevitable, such as technology. Other reasons are not, such as external imposition of quotas. There's no reason why fishing should go the same way as farming, because technology is not the problem. The demand is still there, the fish are there, and the way to catch the fish is to take boats into the water with nets. The argument is that British waters should belong to Britain, not Europe. This isn't comparable to the combine harvester.

    What's their proposed change? That seems to go against what their politicians say will happen if they get what they're protesting for... so something's not in line.
    If anyone is suggesting that reclaiming control of our waters will not improve the economies of fishing communities, they are lying. That should be obvious. More fish at British markets means more income for fishermen. Obviously.

    AND Politicians know that whatever happens with Brexit isn't going to affect the change the fishermen want.
    Politicians are insincere, they are not to be trusted on such issues. They simply pick a side and then try to get votes. Very few politicians have integrity. This is a major flaw with democracy, more so than stupid people voting. Politicians care more about votes than what's actually in the best interest of the country.

    In Holland, yeah. Doesn't speak to there being a market in the UK, though.
    This doesn't make sense. The Dutch aren't taking less fish than we would. If they were, the sustainability argument has some merit. But nobody has said to the UK "you can't fish there because you're irresponsible, we're letting the Dutch do it instead".
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  64. #4189
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,669
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    HOW ARE YOU GUYS STILL TALKING ABOUT FISH?!
    I mean god damn
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  65. #4190
    Ya that's why I moved the uneducated fishermen's arguments to another thread.
  66. #4191
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Ya that's why I moved the uneducated fishermen's arguments to another thread.
    Liar. I did that. You merely suggested it.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  67. #4192
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    Collusion is not a crime on any level, so there's no reason to prove it.

    It's a misdirection.
    Yeah whatever... coordination and conspiracy. Anyway, they somehow found none despite me now having read a couple dozen accounts of what I would call coordination and conspiracy, but I'm not a republican lawyer!

    However on pages 445 and 446 they list 14 matters of criminal activity that have been found by the special council which they considered outside the scope of the investigation. One of which is regarding Cohen, one is the Manafort stuff, the other 12 are redacted.

    cautious:
    Last edited by oskar; 04-18-2019 at 05:58 PM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  68. #4193
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    Towards the end of the lunch, the President brought up Comey and asked if Christie was
    still friendly with him.224 Christie said he was.225 The President told Christie to call Comey and
    tell him that the President "really like[s] him. Tell him he's part of the team."226 At the end of the
    lunch, the President repeated his request that Christie reach out to Comey.227 Christie had no
    intention of complying with the President's request that he contact Comey.228 He thought the
    President's request was "nonsensical" and Christie did not want to put Comey in the position of
    having to receive such a phone call.229 Christie thought it would have been uncomfortable to pass
    on that message.230
    Page 251 (pdf)

    Just hours before meeting one-on-one with Comey, the President told Christie that firing Flynn would put an end to
    the Russia inquiries. And after Christie pushed back, telling the President that firing Flynn would
    not end the Russia investigation, the President asked Christie to reach out to Comey and convey
    that the President liked him and he was part of "the team." That afternoon, the President cleared
    the room and asked Comey to "let[] Flynn go."
    Page 259

    Whoever is currently securing the movie rights to the Trump presidency, they better act fast because the only people who can do this material justice are Jim Abrahams and David Zucker.
    Last edited by oskar; 04-19-2019 at 05:58 PM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  69. #4194
    NO COLLUSION. NO OBSTRUCTION

    Two dozen top level federal prosecutors spent 2 years crawling up your ass and couldn't charge you with a crime. You're fucking innocent. Anyone who believes otherwise is a lunatic.

    Anyone who is still concerned about the President being a criminal traitor was never going to vote for Trump anyway. So MSNBC, CNN, and all the 2020 candidates who are still throwing temper tantrums about this are just sabotaging themselves. They're alienating the moderate voters that they need. So keep whining Oskar, and whoever else is still whining. You're going to get Trump re-elected.

    And impeachment is bonafide loser talk. The election is in 19 months. Just beat the guy. Trump must be stroking his toad every time a 2020 candidate talks about impeachment. The only way that impeachment would be an issue, is if they can't beat Trump. It's bonafide loser talk. And every 2020 candidate is screaming it on TV.

    MAGA
  70. #4195
    Jack Sawyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    7,669
    Location
    Jack-high straight flush motherfucker
    Real talk, I totally forgot about you Banana. What's up?
    My dream... is to fly... over the rainbow... so high...


    Cogito ergo sum

    VHS is like a book? and a book is like a stack of kindles.
    Hey, I'm in a movie!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYdwe3ArFWA
  71. #4196
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    I think impeachment probably wouldn't be the best choice because then Pence can pardon Trump. The report says it handed 14 cases over to other teams because they were outside its scope. Two of those are ongoing and we don't know what they are afaik. He already is implicated as a co-conspirator along with Cohen. His charity is a fraud. We don't know why Deutsche Bank lended him over 2 Billion after he already had defaulted on hundreds of million to the same bank. And SDNY is just waiting until they can indict.

    Looking at the obstruction part, I honestly do not understand what the bar for obstruction is and how you would meet it. He fired Comey "for the russia thing" He asked if firing Flynn would "end the russia thing," he fired Sessions for recusing himself from the investigation, he ordered McGhan to fire Mueller himself. But they couldn't prove intention?

    I do not want a repeat of Nixon. The fact that Nixon and Agnew walked free is more sickening than anything leading up to it. I want Trump in jail. I know it's probably not going to happen, but with impeachment it almost definitely isn't going to happen.
    Last edited by oskar; 04-20-2019 at 07:10 AM.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  72. #4197
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    Looking at the obstruction part, I honestly do not understand what the bar for obstruction is and how you would meet it. .....they couldn't prove intention?
    Pay attention. Get educated:

    Mueller identified 10 things that *could* be obstruction-ish.

    ALLEGATION: The president told disgraced former F.B.I. Director James Comey he “hoped” Comey could see his way clear of letting go of former National Security Adviser Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, who was under investigation, even after the White House fired him.
    TRUTH: Trump had the constitutional authority to legally put a stop to this investigation and did not use it. Expressing one’s “hope” is not an act of obstruction, nor is it an order … it is the expression of one’s hope. What’s more, Trump is expressing this hope about someone else, not himself.

    ALLEGATION: Trump wanted his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to not recuse himself from the Russia investigation.
    TRUTH: So what? Trump selected Sessions to be his attorney general because he had faith in him in that role. Once Sessions recused himself, Trump — and don’t forget we are talking about a man innocent of the treason charges being investigated — was now at the mercy of the same Deep State that was already selectively and illegally leaking to frame him for treason.

    Trump was not calling on Sessions to reverse his recusal and shut down the investigation. He wanted someone he trusted overseeing it. That is not obstruction, it’s common sense and the way you would expect an innocent man to act.

    ALLEGATION: Trump fired Comey to obstruct the investigation.
    TRUTH: Trump fired Comey on Rod Rosenstein’s recommendation. Trump fired Comey because Comey deliberately set him up with that briefing about the phony dossier (Comey’s briefing was the hook the fake news media used to make what became known as the pee pee dossier public). Trump fired Comey because Comey refused to report the truth — that the president was not under investigation and Trump felt (for legitimate reasons) as though he were being blackmailed. Trump fired Comey, as he told Lester Holt on NBC, because he knew Comey would drag his feet with the Russian investigation and Trump wanted to put the issue behind him.

    The only way the firing of Comey could be construed as obstruction is if Comey’s replacement agreed to stop the investigation. That didn’t happen because Trump wanted the exact opposite: he wanted the matter resolved.

    ALLEGATION: Trump was angry about the appointment of a special counsel and expressed a desire to fire people.
    TRUTH: So what? Mueller is actually attempting to claim that Trump’s tweets about the “witch hunt” and his threats to fire people (that were never followed through on) constitute obstruction.

    An innocent man raging against a plot to frame him is not, in any legal or moral sense, obstruction. What’s more, had Trump followed through with firing Mueller and Sessions, that would not have been obstruction because it was well within his legal authority to do so.

    ALLEGATION: Trump asked his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to tell Sessions to announce that the investigation was very unfair to him, and that he had done nothing wrong.
    TRUTH: So what? Asking your attorney general to tell the public the truth is not obstruction.

    ALLEGATION: Trump was not publicly forthcoming about the Trump Tower Meeting.
    TRUTH: Lying to the media or to the public is not obstruction of justice. All Trump did was spin the meeting in the most favorable light possible — which only proves he’s a politician. When Obama did this, the media gushed over his amazing talent at “slow-walking the truth.”

    If lying to the public or to the media is obstruction of justice, the jails are gunna be awfully full.

    ALLEGATION: Trump continued to pressure Sessions to unrecuse himself.
    TRUTH: So what? Trying to put someone else in charge of an investigation is not obstruction. In fact, the Mueller Report notes that Trump told Sessions: “I’m not going to do anything or direct you to do anything. I just want to be treated fairly” — which tells you that Mueller including this in his childish listicle is his way of padding his non-case.

    ALLEGATION: Trump didn’t want the public to know he had “directed McGahn to have the Special Counsel removed in June 2017 and that McGahn had threatened to resign rather than carry out the order. “
    TRUTH: Again, lying to the press and to the public is not obstruction, and if Trump had truly wanted Mueller fired he could have legally done it. This entire narrative about Trump wanting people fired or wanting to put Sessions in charge of the investigation is breathtakingly desperate and dumb.

    ALLEGATION: Trump praised former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Flynn when they held strong and criticized them when they rolled over.
    TRUTH: It is not obstruction of justice to express an opinion and these opinions are perfectly in line with an innocent man being falsely accused of treason while the Deep State and media attempt to frame him.

    What’s more, Trump was almost always publicly expressing these opinions. People do not commit crimes in front of 50 million Twitter followers.

    ALLEGATION: Trump praised his former personal lawyer Michael Cohen when he held strong and criticized him after he rolled over.
    TRUTH: As you can see, to pad his non-case to number ten, rather than include Cohen with Manafort and Flynn, Mueller makes Trump’s reaction to Cohen a separate item.

    Sorry, but in America telling a friend to “stay strong” when he’s under investigation and then publicly calling him a “rat” when he falsely accuses you of crimes is not obstruction.
  73. #4198
    Quote Originally Posted by oskar View Post
    I want Trump in jail.
    Why? How would that improve anything?

    Go post this in the "aaaarrgggggyyahhgghggg" thread
    Last edited by TheSpoonald; 04-20-2019 at 08:47 AM.
  74. #4199
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    That is a very philosophical question.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.
  75. #4200
    oskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    6,698
    Location
    in ur accounts... confiscating ur funz
    That is a lot of instances of someone trying to end an investigation that could be harmful to himself when in reality it's totally something else, don't you think?

    Anyway, you are exemplifying the reason I've said from the moment the Barr letter came out that impeachment is probably not the way to go, because you're in the court of public opinion and the fact that the white house was allowed to spin the story not once but twice before a redacted report comes out means that they've won in the court of public opinion. Barr himself said "no collusion no obstruction" when the report clear as day states that it did not try to answer the question of collusion and left obstruction open for congress.

    In addition, the handling by MSM is shockingly incompetent. Idk how many times I've heard the "I'm fucked" quote without a hint of reflection why the quote is in the report in the first place. It's there to show intent in obstruction.
    The strengh of a hero is defined by the weakness of his villains.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •