US General Election 2020 Arrse Poll

[bob_the_bomb]

Just adding fuel to the fire with conspiracy theories.

It is claimed that it was in fact the CIA’s Cyber Hacker Team operating out of Frankfurt (whose existence was exposed by WikiLeaks) under the guise of Scytl, that was actually raided.


Unraveling the Latest Deep State Coup | The Spectator | Truth Conquers All

Note the IP address 52.57.209.147 and draw your own conclusions.

View attachment 521387

No. Under the SOFA they do not have the authority to conduct policing actions outside military bases except under very specific circumstances.

 

[shouldknowbetter]

I think you’re beginning to stretch it in defence of Trump to be honest.

Especially in light of his shameful behaviour of late.

I’m only defending him in so far as there is plenty of blame to go around and numerous posters on this site seem to want to place it all in his lap. One even held him solely responsible for 224,000 deaths (the message that got me grief for jokingly calling the poster a liar) through incompetence. I agree he has done things wrong and made mistakes. I just think others have too and to try to say that he should have done better and it was all in his gift to be a better leader and come to a better resolution just defies reality. Yes he should have tried to cross the party divide but if you really believe that the Democratic Party politicians would have joined in to make the outcome better then you are just fooling yourself.

As to his current behaviour that’s around the election, which I suppose is the theme of this thread, no it’s not been pleasant. I think how he gets treated drives how he responds, which is only human. That’s not to say I think he’s right necessarily. However his treatment is different to virtually any other politician in history.

For example, start this video then close your eyes and imagine that Donald Trump was speaking those words.


Would the media have given him the benefit of the doubt, realised he misspoke, meant fraud prevention and moved on. If not, why not? You may say he’s the boy who cried wolf and that he‘s lost the right to the benefit of the doubt. That may be because he’s never had it. From the very beginning the media and his opponents have taken everything he says and tweets utterly literally and “fact checked” him on it. No-one else gets treated like that. Why only him?

If you don’t agree he’s been badly treated at all then fine. I just don’t agree, despite his many and very clear faults, (boorish, arrogant, argumentative) he has done enough to deserve being treated the way he has been and continues to be by his opponents, much of the US and world media and a number of posters on this site. The situation that America finds itself in is by no means all his responsibility. Many people acted in bad ways to get them where they are and I would just like some people to recognise that fact.

 

[Matelot Spy]

No. Under the SOFA they do not have the authority to conduct policing actions outside military bases except under very specific circumstances.

The article states that they would have been identified as US military personnel.

SOFA

Article VII​

1. Subject to the provisions of this Article,
   1. the military authorities of the sending State shall have the right to exercise within the receiving State all criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by the law of the sending State over all persons subject to the military law of that State;

 

[bob_the_bomb]

I’m only defending him in so far as there is plenty of blame to go around and numerous posters on this site seem to want to place it all in his lap. One even held him solely responsible for 224,000 deaths (the message that got me grief for jokingly calling the poster a liar) through incompetence. I agree he has done things wrong and made mistakes. I just think others have too and to try to say that he should have done better and it was all in his gift to be a better leader and come to a better resolution just defies reality. Yes he should have tried to cross the party divide but if you really believe that the Democratic Party politicians would have joined in to make the outcome better then you are just fooling yourself.

As to his current behaviour that’s around the election, which I suppose is the theme of this thread, no it’s not been pleasant. I think how he gets treated drives how he responds, which is only human. That’s not to say I think he’s right necessarily. However his treatment is different to virtually any other politician in history.

For example, start this video then close your eyes and imagine that Donald Trump was speaking those words.


Would the media have given him the benefit of the doubt, realised he misspoke, meant fraud prevention and moved on. If not, why not? You may say he’s the boy who cried wolf and that he‘s lost the right to the benefit of the doubt. That may be because he’s never had it. From the very beginning the media and his opponents have taken everything he says and tweets utterly literally and “fact checked” him on it. No-one else gets treated like that. Why only him?

If you don’t agree he’s been badly treated at all then fine. I just don’t agree, despite his many and very clear faults, (boorish, arrogant, argumentative) he has done enough to deserve being treated the way he has been and continues to be by his opponents, much of the US and world media and a number of posters on this site. The situation that America finds itself in is by no means all his responsibility. Many people acted in bad ways to get them where they are and I would just like some people to recognise that fact.

Good points, well presented!

For me the rot set in just after his inauguration with the ‘more people came’ shite. And then his staff tried to defend the indefensible.

And on it went with his 3AM twitter tirades.

The way he behaved during the final debate was very telling. It showed that he could behave as a grown up. If he’d behaved like that during his entire presidency he’d have done a lot better. All the polls - whilst accurately predicting a Biden win - all gave Trump a chance, and he did do better than expected.

Remember too that the various threads have seen some bizarre conspiraloon stuff posted, and when one* idiot polarises the conversation it tends to push others in the opposite direction. The faux ‘analysis’ and the tin foil hattery about fraud haven’t helped.




* ok more than one. You lot know who you are...

 

[bob_the_bomb]

The article states that they would have been identified as US military personnel.

SOFA

I suspect you’re selectively quoting the SOFA. You’re also ignoring the phrase ‘subject to the provisions...’

But we can ask people who had to deal with this stuff as a matter of course:

@Provost

@Berlin_104s

@BossHogg

 

[Matelot Spy]

I suspect you’re selectively quoting the SOFA. You’re also ignoring the phrase ‘subject to the provisions...’

But we can ask people who had to deal with this stuff as a matter of course:

@Provost

@Berlin_104s

@BossHogg

Take your tears to exCIA Officer Larry C Johnson who wrote the article.

 

[Berlin_104s]

I suspect you’re selectively quoting the SOFA. You’re also ignoring the phrase ‘subject to the provisions...’

But we can ask people who had to deal with this stuff as a matter of course:

@Provost

@Berlin_104s

@BossHogg

The key phrase is jurisdiction over those 'subject to military law', which includes service personnel, their dependants, their guests if visiting and civilian personnel such as CS and what the UK terms as UK- based civilians (teachers, civilian doctors and nurses, etc.); it does not include locally-employed civilians working on camp and neither does it include the civilian* population.

* - ETA either host nation or other.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[bob_the_bomb]

The key phrase is jurisdiction over those 'subject to military law', which includes service personnel, their dependants, their guests if visiting and civilian personnel such as CS and what the UK terms as UK- based civilians (teachers, civilian doctors and nurses, etc.); it does not include locally-employed civilians working on camp and neither does it include the civilian* population.

* - ETA either host nation or other.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

So the RMP wouldn’t have been able to go full Tonto on some civvy company then?

If there had been any truth to the story I’d guess that the Americans MIGHT have been able to send in an observer with the Bundespolitzei?

 

[bob_the_bomb]

Take your tears to exCIA Officer Larry C Johnson who wrote the article.

Only tears here are of laughter at your backing off and hiding behind the bloke who wrote the article.

“A big boy done it and run away”

 

[Berlin_104s]

So the RMP wouldn’t have been able to go full Tonto on some civvy company then?

If there had been any truth to the story I’d guess that the Americans MIGHT have been able to send in an observer with the Bundespolitzei?

Err, no!! It would've been the GCP.

The only time since the end of the second unpleasantness where the Service Police have had jurisdiction over the civilian population was in Kosovo in 1999 - I was there and remember it well. And only for a very limited period of time (couple of months max) after the local police had been hoofed out and the UN took over the running of the country with their own multinational police force.

ETA 'possibly' to your last para.


Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[offog]

The key phrase is jurisdiction over those 'subject to military law', which includes service personnel, their dependants, their guests if visiting and civilian personnel such as CS and what the UK terms as UK- based civilians (teachers, civilian doctors and nurses, etc.); it does not include locally-employed civilians working on camp and neither does it include the civilian* population.

* - ETA either host nation or other.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

I have a vague memory of a dependant charged with murder (?) of another dependant and court marshalled rather than handed over to the GCP.

 

[offog]

Take your tears to exCIA Officer Larry C Johnson who wrote the article.

Reliably informed normally means some guy down the pub.

This Lary C Johnson. A very credible person.

Larry C. Johnson - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. He is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group). He is best known for spreading a hoax in 2008 that Republican operatives had a videotape of Michelle Obama complaining about "whitey".[1]

Allegations that British intelligence wiretapped Donald Trump[edit]​

In March 2017, Andrew Napolitano spread the unfounded conspiracy theory that GCHQ, one of Britain's top intelligence agencies, had wiretapped Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign on orders from President Obama.[1][22] Johnson was the source for Napolitano's claim.[1][23] The conspiracy theory was later asserted as fact by President Trump, with him citing Fox News and Napolitano.[1] GCHQ responded, stating that the claims were "nonsense, utterly ridiculous and should be ignored".[24] Fox News later disavowed the statement by Napolitano.[1]

Edited to add wiki link and comments.

 

[bob_the_bomb]

Err, no!! It would've been the GCP.

The only time since the end of the second unpleasantness where the Service Police have had jurisdiction over the civilian population was in Kosovo in 1999 - I was there and remember it well. And only for a very limited period of time (couple of months max) after the local police had been hoofed out and the UN took over the running of the country with their own multinational police force.

ETA 'possibly' to your last para.


Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

Thank you!

@Matelot Spy please take note...

 

[Berlin_104s]

I have a vague memory of a dependant charged with murder (?) of another dependant and court marshalled rather than handed over to the GCP.

Yes, I heard that too. The flip side of that coin was the power that COs had over their soldier's spouses. I can recall a couple of occasions where wifey was sent* back to the UK on the COs direction and hubby moved back into the block.

* - this was an order!!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[Snowy.]

Trumps Attorney Sidney Powell confirms that the Dominion voting servers were seized in Germany..

 

[Helm]

I'll add confirms to the list of words you don't understand.

 

[endure]

Trumps Attorney Sidney Powell confirms that the Dominion voting servers were seized in Germany..

So 'somebody' seized a server in Germany and Trump's own lawyer doesn't know who it was or where it is?

 

[Ortholith]

So 'somebody' seized a server in Germany and Trump's own lawyer doesn't know who it was or where it is?

You don't sound totally convinced.

 

[Snowy.]

So 'somebody' seized a server in Germany and Trump's own lawyer doesn't know who it was or where it is?

It was reported the US army seized but she said she doesn't know which side has them (good repubs - bad demorats)..

 

[endure]

It was reported the US army seized but she said she doesn't know which side has them (good repubs - bad demorats)..

The US Army has no jurisdiction in Germany.