America's Darkest Days II: Blackest Night

[Asura]

Looks like someone is a little more than worried at actual consequences of being summoned to the UK to ACTUALLY answer questions and not send a patsy that simply says nothing.

I don't get the parliament summons, though. I mean on what basis does that work? Parliament isn't a court of law.

[Brad]

Yeah, it's surely just an invitation. Surely he can just say no, at which point they could charge him with a crime and let him have his day in court?

[Asura]

Surely he can just say no, at which point they could charge him with a crime and let him have his day in court?

I guess what I meant to ask was, if he's committed a crime, summon him to court. If he hasn't, then don't. I don't understand why MPs want to talk to him, or why they feel he'll come running if they ask; he's the citizen of another nation.

[Brad]

I completely agree!

[fishbowlhead]

I guess what I meant to ask was, if he's committed a crime, summon him to court. If he hasn't, then don't. I don't understand why MPs want to talk to him, or why they feel he'll come running if they ask; he's the citizen of another nation.

If he’s doing business in this country, then he’s also subject to that country’s laws. He was asked the first time round, at which point he sent a stooge. Now he’s being summoned.

[Asura]

If he’s doing business in this country, then he’s also subject to that country’s laws. He was asked the first time round, at which point he sent a stooge. Now he’s being summoned.

I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is that if his company has broken the law, shouldn't he summoned to a court?

[fishbowlhead]

I'm not disputing that. What I'm saying is that if his company has broken the law, shouldn't he summoned to a court?

I think the summons is really with the intent of dragging him personally over the coals and actually getting some meaningful changes made (rather than the nonsense lip service he’s currently implementing) then starting formal legal proceedings if that fails.

Basically the only way of getting any changing done now is by threatening him directly. Otherwise Facebook will carry on with impunity.

[QualityChimp]

They fuddy duddy MPs just want his help with their computers.
"When I'm on the internets, I can't get on ePay. Can you help with the AOL dial-in?"

[Dogg Thang]

QC, you are a constant source of joy.

[Brad]

He really is. Never change.

[Asura]

They fuddy duddy MPs just want his help with their computers.
"When I'm on the internets, I can't get on ePay. Can you help with the AOL dial-in?"

I actually think this is the source of my confusion. I mean this is the house of people who only a few years ago had to have someone explain the internet to them via a metaphor involving pipes. It's just that I have zero faith - in fact, less than zero - in them dealing with technology issues.

[QualityChimp]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-emoluments-clause-indonesia-project-500-million-china-golf-course-norm-eisen-a8353296.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-china-zte_us_5af9f701e4b0200bcab7fa66

72 hours after the Chinese government invest 1/2 billion dollars into an Indonesian hotel project, in which The Trump Group is building a resort and golf course, Trump bails out a Chinese cell phone manufacturer.

At a press conference, the Whitehouse was asked:
“Can you explain the administration’s position on A, how this doesn’t violate the emoluments clause; and B, how this wouldn’t violate the president’s own promise that his private organization would not be getting involved in new foreign deals while he was president?”

Deputy White House Press Secretary Raj Shah simply responded: “I’ll have to refer you to the Trump Organization.”

[MartyG]

Shady fake president does shady stuff. Who knew?

Meanwhile, Trump confirms he's a liar by now admitting he did pay off Cohen for paying Stormy Daniels, despite earlier claiming he knew nothing about it and it being fake news, now it's okay because it's a legal expense: https://www.npr.org/2018/05/16/61166...aniels-payment. Initially Trump's lawayers tried to claim Trump didn't need to sign the disclosure - shady fake president, shady lawyers. Who knew?

This disclosure throws up yet more financial contradictions https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...?noredirect=on

[Neon Ignition]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6306261/donald-trump-indictment-robert-mueller-russia-election-investigation/

Apparently Mueller has stated that Trump cannot be convicted of collusion with the Russians due to his Presidential status.

I'm not sure why Guiliano thinks that's reason to rush a close to the investigation. It's clearly unearthing all sorts of shenanigans and plays a key role in destroying Trump's position and future chances of remaining President for 8 years. It's still getting results so claiming it needs to wrap up quickly because it's 1 year in once again shows how desperate they still are to distract that America clearly has a criminal in charge.

[fishbowlhead]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/630626...investigation/

Apparently Mueller has stated that Trump cannot be convicted of collusion with the Russians due to his Presidential status.

I'm not sure why Guiliano thinks that's reason to rush a close to the investigation. It's clearly unearthing all sorts of shenanigans and plays a key role in destroying Trump's position and future chances of remaining President for 8 years. It's still getting results so claiming it needs to wrap up quickly because it's 1 year in once again shows how desperate they still are to distract that America clearly has a criminal in charge.

Claims a president can’t be convicted of breaking the law because he’s president.

We used to call that a dictatorship.