The Trump Presidency...

Pob02

LE
Book Reviewer
It's swings and roundabouts when comparing the NHS to insurance based health systems as used in America.

I don't know whether @LJONESY has health insurance. If he does, he will get whatever treatment he needs. Unlike the NHS, American insurance companies can't refuse to treat you because it would be too expensive. On the other hand, if Jonesy does not have health insurance, he could well be stuffed if he has a minor or chronic ailment that charity hospitals, or the VA if he is a veteran, wont treat.

When my wife was ill, she was sent to see a NHS doctor who is the leading expert in the country in her illness. Even well insured Americans don't have access to eminent doctors. Here, you could be homeless and still have Sir Magdi Yacoub, world leading cardiologist, performing your heart surgery.

On the other hand, the NHS regularly kills people due to trivial reasons like dirty hospitals, drug rationing, political interference in funding and even starvation as happened in Stafford Hospital. As a Yank posting on here pointed out, that doesn't happen in America because 1) The company that owned the hospital would be sued into bankruptcy and 2) The individuals responsible, from nurses to the CEO of the company would be in prison, many for the rest of their lives. I don't think there was a single prosecution after the Staffordshire disaster.

There's no clear winner in a comparison between US and UK health systems. Each has advantages and disadvantages. The French system is often viewed as the best in the world. It is a mixture of free service with insurance and some co-payments.
Having used UK, Swiss, French and now Catalan system, I can happily say I do not agree with your last statement.

Catalan is bloody good ( helps that the “CAP”, basically local GP office, is just over the road from my apartment of course).
 

Guns

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Another former Trump aide has been caught up in a scandal - Jason Miller has been accused of secretly giving a woman an abortion pill hidden in a smoothie after getting her pregnant during an affair.
Couldn’t have happen to a more worthy person. The fat ****.
 
What the Muller investigation has found to date:

Robert Mueller’s special counsel has resulted in dozens of indictments and subsequent charges, which many casual observers on the Left seem to view as confirmation that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Witch hunts (even of the literal nature) always find some “guilty” individuals, though a common theme is that their guilt has nothing to do with the original goal of the hunt. That’s on full display in Mueller’s special counsel.
When Rod Rosenstein authorized Mueller’s special counsel after the firing of James Comey, it authorized Mueller to investigate “any links links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and (ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and (iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).”
After reviewing those charges, it’s clear that no evidence of “collusion” has been uncovered.
George Papadopoulos.
First charged: October 3, 2017.
Charges: One count of making false statements to the FBI.
Specifics: Made misleading statements to the FBI about his interactions with “an overseas professor” (Joseph Mifsud) who had alleged ties to the Russian government. Mifsud has donated to the Clinton Foundation in the past. No charges relating to actual Russian collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Rick Gates and Paul Manafort
First charged: October 27, 2017, then February 22, 2018.
Charges: Manafort – Found guilty of 8 counts: five tax fraud charges, one charge of hiding foreign bank accounts and two counts of bank fraud. Gates – 2 counts: conspiracy against the United States and false statements.
Specifics: All regarding tax evasion and money laundering. Zero charges are related to collusion between the Donald Trump campaign and the Russian government.
Michael Flynn
First charged: November 30, 2017.
Charges: One count of making false statements to the FBI. Flynn allegedly lied during an interview with two agents.
Specifics: As James Comey confirmed, neither of the FBI agents that Flynn allegedly lied to thought that Flynn was being untruthful. Flynn spoke to a Russian ambassador following the 2016 election, which is standard given Flynn’s former position. Flynn was quizzed on the contents of his conversation with the ambassador, none of which were criminal. The FBI had known this because they surveilled Flynn’s call and knew its exact contents before testing Flynn on how well he could recall it.
Richard Pinedo
First charged: February 2, 2018.
Charges: One count of identity theft.
Specifics: Pinedo operated the website Auction Essistance, which brokered bank account numbers to allow peopl ebanned from eBay and PayPal (and similar websites) to return to those websites under a different identity. Pinedo transferred, possessed and used the identities of other people in connection with unlawful activity, according to a statement of the offense. I’m not sure how this could have less to do with Russian collusion.
Alex van der Zwaan
First charged: February 2, 2018.
Charges: Lying to the FBI and Special Counsel about his interactions with Rick Gates and Konstantin Kilimnik (a Ukrainian associate of Manafort).
Specifics: None relating to Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.
Dzheykhun Aslanov, Gleb Vasilchenko, Internet Research Agency LLC, Irina Kaverzina Vladimir Venkov, Anna Bogacheva Maria Bovda Robert Bovda Mikhail Burchik Mikhail Bystrov Aleksandra Krylova Vadim Podkopaev Sergey Polozov Yevgeny Prigozhin Concord Catering, and Concord Management and Consulting LLC
First charged: February 16, 2018
Charges: Multiple charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States and aggravated identity theft. Conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud.
Specifics: Mueller alleges that the Russians indicted “communicated with unwitting individuals associated with the Trump campaign,” with the key word being “unwitting,” as there’s no evidence that the Trump campaign members knew. More specifically, their crimes include “making expenditures in connection with the 2016 U.S. presidential election without proper regulatory disclosure; failing to register as foreign agents carrying out political activities within the United States; and obtaining visas through false and fraudulent statements.”
While they did try to interfere with the U.S. election, there is no evidence of collusion.
Konstantin Kilimnik
First charged: June 8, 2018
Charges: Two counts: obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice.
Specifics: Communicated with Rick Gates and Paul Manafort (who he’d known since 2005), and aided them in laundering money. “Russia” is mentioned in his indictment only when referencing to the country as a location.
Boris Antonov, Dmitriy Badin, Nikolay Kozachek, Aleksey Lukashev, Artem Malyshev, Sergey Morgachev, Viktor Netyksho, Aleksey Potemkin, Ivan Yermakov, Pavel Yershov, Aleksandr Osadchuk, and Anatoliy Kovalev
First charged: August 31, 2018.
Charges: Multiple charges of conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, aggravated identity theft, and conspiracy to launder money.
Specifics: Attempted interference with U.S. election, but not through collusion with the Trump campaign. Also money laundering and identity theft.
W. Samuel Patten
First charged: August 31, 2018
Charges: Violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act
Specifics: Patten failed to register as a foreign agent with the Justice Department when he represented the Ukrainian political party “Opposition Bloc” from 2014 through 2018. He also admitted to laundering a $50,000 donation from Kilmnik to the Trump inauguration committee (there is no evidence to suggest anyone associated with the Trump campaign knew anything of this).
In Conclusion
Mueller has burned no shortage of witches at the stake with his investigation – but we still have yet to see a single charge of witchcraft.
Thank you for posting that. There are so many names and cases that I lost track and stopped paying attention.
 
It's swings and roundabouts when comparing the NHS to insurance based health systems as used in America.

I don't know whether @LJONESY has health insurance. If he does, he will get whatever treatment he needs. Unlike the NHS, American insurance companies can't refuse to treat you because it would be too expensive. On the other hand, if Jonesy does not have health insurance, he could well be stuffed if he has a minor or chronic ailment that charity hospitals, or the VA if he is a veteran, wont treat.

When my wife was ill, she was sent to see a NHS doctor who is the leading expert in the country in her illness. Even well insured Americans don't have access to eminent doctors. Here, you could be homeless and still have Sir Magdi Yacoub, world leading cardiologist, performing your heart surgery.

On the other hand, the NHS regularly kills people due to trivial reasons like dirty hospitals, drug rationing, political interference in funding and even starvation as happened in Stafford Hospital. As a Yank posting on here pointed out, that doesn't happen in America because 1) The company that owned the hospital would be sued into bankruptcy and 2) The individuals responsible, from nurses to the CEO of the company would be in prison, many for the rest of their lives. I don't think there was a single prosecution after the Staffordshire disaster.

There's no clear winner in a comparison between US and UK health systems. Each has advantages and disadvantages. The French system is often viewed as the best in the world. It is a mixture of free service with insurance and some co-payments.

Excuse me for the late response, was on Safari today.

I have health insurance die my family and myself through my employer. As far as plans go around it is pretty close to a Cadillac plan. But it is pricey, I pay close to
400 a month for health, dental and vision for the family. It covers about 85 percent of in network expenses, after the deductible is met. I think the out of pocket max is 4K.
We pay a ton of money, but the treatment is pretty decent for the most part.

I also have VA coverage for life and am in Priority group 3 becauase I was a bit dinged up back in the day. Priority groups 1 and 2 are for the guys who got really hurt. I consider myself pretty lucky to not be i those categories. The VA however does not move or get things done as quickly as private sector health care and they have their “quirks”. My old man just recently went into the VA so discuss the results of a blood test he took back in February. Another gentleman I know was diagnosed with a Pneumonia by the VA.....He actually had lunch cancer.

So spendy can at times be better for the major conditions one has.
 
Now, I wonder why the UK government is begging Trump not to de-classify documents? - something to hide? was our govt involved in a conspiracy to stop Trump being elected?
- surely not!

Report: Brits Asked Trump Not To Declassify Russia Docs

  • President Donald Trump backtracked on an order Friday to declassify and release documents related to the FBI’s collusion investigation
  • Trump claimed that two foreign allies expressed concerns over releasing the documents
  • The New York Times reports that the British government was one of the allies. According to The Times, the Brits were concerned about releasing information about Christopher Steele, the former MI6 officer who wrote the unverified dossier
The British government asked President Donald Trump not to release a trove of documents from the Russia investigation, according to The New York Times.
Trump ordered Monday the release of a slew of documents from the Russia probe, including a June 2017 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application granted against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. But the Republican suddenly backtracked Friday, saying that he would refer declassification issues to the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General.
Trump said the Justice Department and two foreign allies had raised concerns about declassifying and releasing the documents.
“We are moving along, we are also dealing with foreign countries that do have a problem,” Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Thursday, before reneging on the declassification order.
 
Nope, no hint of an attempt to twist the facts to suit the Orange Agenda there....... 2/10

still , attribution would have been nice....... uncredited cut 'n' paste damages your credibility darling

THE LIST: Not a Single Special Counsel Indictment Mentions Russian Collusion

Dan Bongino - Wikipedia

Short version? Rabid Trumpeter tries to defend Trump, fails shocker

From the Wiki (see? not hard to credit source)

Political views
Bongino is a member of Groundswell, a coalition of conservative and libertarian activists fighting to advance conservative causes, according to public documents.[11]

Bongino opposes the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (commonly referred to as Obamacare) and penned an editorial against it.[12]

Bongino has downplayed the Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections investigation, calling it a "total scam."[13] In May 2018, Bongino was quoted by President Donald Trump in one of his tweets, as Bongino attacked former CIA Director John Brennan. Bongino was quoted as saying Brennan "has disgraced the entire Intelligence Community. He is the one man who is largely responsible for the destruction of American’s faith in the Intelligence Community and in some people at the........top of the FBI."[14] Bongino was also quoted as alleging that Brennan was "worried about staying out of jail."[14]

In May 2018 after Republican Congressman Trey Gowdy and some conservative legal experts refuted Trump's claims that the FBI had spied on his 2016 presidential campaign, Bongino attacked Gowdy, saying that he had been "fooled" by the Department of Justice.[15]
so what you are saying is that it is true and you cannot counter it so you go for the man instead - well done you!
 
@headgear

Still one of my favourite bits from one of my favourite films.
You Americans, you are incapable of secrecy because you are a democracy.
Well, no not really. Currently they are incapable of secrecy because their President appears ready to burn the national interest (and any allies) for his own personal agenda.


Incidentally, I've not got to the bottom of "Insa" - but it is apparently a Jordanian colloquial of frustration when the other person simply isn't getting the point

يِ ولك خلص أنصه

Ya Waleek khalas - Insa! (You idiot, we're done!)

Which is apparently quite rude, so don't say that!
 
Last edited:
But what about Benghazi :p.
Republicans complaining about dubious witch hunts when they went after Hilary and failed to find anything chargeable her emails were more secure than the offical server and Apprantly the government email system is utterly borked anyway.
Benghazi was a **** up although reps cut the budget for embassy security most of the rescue plans made call of duty look ultra realistic.
 
Last edited:
But what about Benghazi :p.
Republicans complaining about dubious witch hunts when they went after Hilary and failed to find anything chargeable her emails were more secure than the offical server and Apprantly the government email system is utterly borked anyway.
Benghazi was a **** up although reps cut the budget for embassy security most of the rescue plans made call of duty look ultra realistic.
The Republicans did their level best to hang Benghazi on Clinton although it would be more apt to say hang her with Benghazi but out of the several investigation including five Republican led house committees Clinton was cleared. This hasn't stopped many of the Trump cult trotting it out during fits of whataboutary including on this thread, it's almost as if they either hadn't bothered to read the Benghazi report, didn't know there was a report or hadn't seen it mentioned on Fox News.
 
What it must be to be a democratically elected President, to live in such fear of one's own people in one's own country: Trump Motorcade in NY
Ah bless him.

The Orange Mushroomcock wanted a parade and actually got one courtesy of the NYPD.

He must be proud.

The crowds weren’t exactly overwhelming were they?

Overtime bonanza for NYs finest though.

I like the fact it has it's break down truck, nothing like confidence.
I missed that.

To be fair that was probably not down to the Umber Needledick. More likely down to the SS to get vehicles out of the way.
 
Benghazi was a **** up although reps cut the budget for embassy security most of the rescue plans made call of duty look ultra realistic.
This is what the US State Department testified-

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/12/politics/fact-check-benghazi-security/

State Department Official Charlene Lamb Testified Before The House Oversight Committee That Budget Cuts Had Nothing To Do With Security Decisions In Benghazi.

REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA): “It has been suggested the budget cuts are responsible for lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally, was there any budget consideration and lack of budget that led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

CHARLENE LAMB: “No, sir.”

REP. BLAKE FARENHOLD (R-TX):"So there’s not a budget problem. It’s not you all don’t have the money to do this?"

CHARLENE LAMB:"Sir, it’s a volatile situation. We will move assets to cover that,"

(U.S. House Of Representatives, Oversight And Government Reform Committee, Hearing, 10/10/12)

More of the same on May 8, 2013. Responding to a Democratic member who pointed to embassy security spending in recent GOP House budgets, committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., prodded Eric Nordstrom, former regional security officer in Libya, about Lamb’s previous testimony.

REP. DARRELL ISSA (R-CA): "Mr. Nordstrom, you were on that panel. Do you remember what she (Lamb) said?"

NORDSTROM: "Yes, she said that resources was not an issue,".... "And I think I would also point to the (Accountability Review Board) report, if I'm not mistaken, that they talked to our chief financial officer with (Diplomatic Security), who also said that resources were not an issue."



- The Washington Post
 
This is what the US State Department testified-

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/12/politics/fact-check-benghazi-security/

State Department Official Charlene Lamb Testified Before The House Oversight Committee That Budget Cuts Had Nothing To Do With Security Decisions In Benghazi.

REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R-CA): “It has been suggested the budget cuts are responsible for lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to ask Ms. Lamb, you made this decision personally, was there any budget consideration and lack of budget that led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?”

CHARLENE LAMB: “No, sir.”

REP. BLAKE FARENHOLD (R-TX):"So there’s not a budget problem. It’s not you all don’t have the money to do this?"

CHARLENE LAMB:"Sir, it’s a volatile situation. We will move assets to cover that,"

(U.S. House Of Representatives, Oversight And Government Reform Committee, Hearing, 10/10/12)

More of the same on May 8, 2013. Responding to a Democratic member who pointed to embassy security spending in recent GOP House budgets, committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., prodded Eric Nordstrom, former regional security officer in Libya, about Lamb’s previous testimony.

REP. DARRELL ISSA (R-CA): "Mr. Nordstrom, you were on that panel. Do you remember what she (Lamb) said?"

NORDSTROM: "Yes, she said that resources was not an issue,".... "And I think I would also point to the (Accountability Review Board) report, if I'm not mistaken, that they talked to our chief financial officer with (Diplomatic Security), who also said that resources were not an issue."



- The Washington Post
So was Hillary to blame or not? Give me a simple yes or no.
 
@headgear

Still one of my favourite bits from one of my favourite films.


Well, no not really. Currently they are incapable of secrecy because their President appears ready to burn the national interest (and any allies) for his own personal agenda.


Incidentally, I've not got to the bottom of "Insa" - but it is apparently a Jordanian colloquial of frustration when the other person simply isn't getting the point

يِ ولك خلص أنصه

Ya Waleek khalas - Insa! (You idiot, we're done!)

Which is apparently quite rude, so don't say that!
"If you are not thinking about pussy, you're just not concentrating ." No truer words have ever been said.
 

Top