RugbyRebels

I'd ask what a yellow Tory is, but I'm not actually interested so happy to gloss over that.

The Labour Party for all it's been taken over by the Trots (what colour they?) in any number of leadership roles is still a broad church, there are plenty of party members and indeed parliamentary members who're much more comfortable with a left of centre social policy allied to some changes on the tax front whilst retaining far from confidence in a regulated market than the Trots, it's not like there was Chuka and everybody else in the party in two distinct groups.

Do I dare respond? I didn't think it was a massively contentious term and it certainly wasn't an attack on you.

How would I know if it's a contentious point? I'd need to know what it means to even be able to take a view.

Back on Trump, though I accept Morepork never lost contact with Trump for even a moment, I see the GOP have released their answer to the Congressional report into Trump using his office to commit crimes. And whilst it's not shocking in that they have doubled down over and over when it comes to backing Trump over reality it is shocking that any serious adult is willing to use public office to deny reality. I'd say for shame but I cannot imagine they feel any.

Digby wrote:How would I know if it's a contentious point? I'd need to know what it means to even be able to take a view.

Libdem I thought.

Digby wrote:How would I know if it's a contentious point? I'd need to know what it means to even be able to take a view.

This is an absolutely baffling conversation. You told me you didn't know what it means, despite seemingly being offended by it, and then referenced it again in your reply. I'm just telling you that it wasn't anything offensive directed at you, which you've somehow taken either as an insult or just an excuse to be condescending.

Back to Trump indeed.

Mikey Brown wrote:

Digby wrote:How would I know if it's a contentious point? I'd need to know what it means to even be able to take a view.

This is an absolutely baffling conversation. You told me you didn't know what it means, despite seemingly being offended by it, and then referenced it again in your reply. I'm just telling you that it wasn't anything offensive directed at you, which you've somehow taken either as an insult or just an excuse to be condescending.

Back to Trump indeed.

Your bafflement might be stemming from your assumption I was offended. I'd simply never heard anyone talk about Yellow Tories.

Banquo might be right it means a Lib Dem Tory, though given he's been Labour more than Lib Dei calling him a Red Tory seems more apt, or it might mean a gutless Tory, or it could mean something different again. Though as before I don't much care. And feck off, I don't need an excuse to be condescending, or wrong and in denial about it

Digby wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Digby wrote:How would I know if it's a contentious point? I'd need to know what it means to even be able to take a view.

This is an absolutely baffling conversation. You told me you didn't know what it means, despite seemingly being offended by it, and then referenced it again in your reply. I'm just telling you that it wasn't anything offensive directed at you, which you've somehow taken either as an insult or just an excuse to be condescending.

Back to Trump indeed.

Your bafflement might be stemming from your assumption I was offended. I'd simply never heard anyone talk about Yellow Tories.

Banquo might be right it means a Lib Dem Tory, though given he's been Labour more than Lib Dei calling him a Red Tory seems more apt, or it might mean a gutless Tory, or it could mean something different again. Though as before I don't much care. And feck off, I don't need an excuse to be condescending, or wrong and in denial about it

or blue labour

Digby wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Digby wrote:How would I know if it's a contentious point? I'd need to know what it means to even be able to take a view.

This is an absolutely baffling conversation. You told me you didn't know what it means, despite seemingly being offended by it, and then referenced it again in your reply. I'm just telling you that it wasn't anything offensive directed at you, which you've somehow taken either as an insult or just an excuse to be condescending.

Back to Trump indeed.

Your bafflement might be stemming from your assumption I was offended. I'd simply never heard anyone talk about Yellow Tories.

Banquo might be right it means a Lib Dem Tory, though given he's been Labour more than Lib Dei calling him a Red Tory seems more apt, or it might mean a gutless Tory, or it could mean something different again. Though as before I don't much care. And feck off, I don't need an excuse to be condescending, or wrong and in denial about it

Okay. Think we’re back on track now.

"The Democrats nonetheless tell a story of an illicit pressure campaign run by President Trump through his personal attorney, Mayor Giuliani, to coerce Ukraine to investigate the President’s political rival by withholding a meeting and security assistance. There is, however, no direct, firsthand evidence of any such scheme.'

What an outstanding line from the GOP report. And yes, we would have to conclude as it stands its not without foundation, but only because Trump has blocked those with first hand evidence from testifying, and it seems odd to have any defence that says 'see I stopped the witness from speaking to what they saw, and this proves my innocence'

'The Democrats’ narrative is so dependent on speculation that one Democrat publicly justified hearsay as “better” than direct evidence'

I mean FFS, without context that's just sodding taking the piss. Hearsay might well be better than direct evidence, it's arrant nonsense to suggest otherwise, where are they getting the idea that writing this drivel is useful?

'The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor.'

I'm not even sure what they mean by this because yes they did, do they mean the witnesses didn't use the words bribery or extortion? And if so why would anyone be expecting them to, forming a conclusion such as bribery isn't for those witnesses that have testified, they're only there to speak to facts they know about and are asked about.

There's over a 100 pages of this total and utter bollocks. Some of it is in fairness true, but only true from a certain point of view and if you ignore much else that's known, or it's true but just not relevant.

Digby wrote:Back on Trump, though I accept Morepork never lost contact with Trump for even a moment, I see the GOP have released their answer to the Congressional report into Trump using his office to commit crimes. And whilst it's not shocking in that they have doubled down over and over when it comes to backing Trump over reality it is shocking that any serious adult is willing to use public office to deny reality. I'd say for shame but I cannot imagine they feel any.

Hey. Fuck you buddy.

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:Back on Trump, though I accept Morepork never lost contact with Trump for even a moment, I see the GOP have released their answer to the Congressional report into Trump using his office to commit crimes. And whilst it's not shocking in that they have doubled down over and over when it comes to backing Trump over reality it is shocking that any serious adult is willing to use public office to deny reality. I'd say for shame but I cannot imagine they feel any.

Hey. Fuck you buddy.

I don't judge your seeking a role as a 21st Century groom of the stool

Worth noting, as it seems to be going through on the quiet, that Trump has increased the US exposure to trade wars in the last week, both in Europe and Latin America. And the coverage of the process of Donald is drowning out coverage of his actuality

It's constitutional law Vs. Twitter at the moment.

Fuck me.

More sterling work from team orange as they push through measures that'll make it harder for the poorest Americans to gain access to food. This vital work to reduce the government's role in public life and reduce the federal budget is probably less than 10% of the subsidies team orange are paying to farmers to make up for team orange's pointless and harmful trade wars

The department of agriculture runs both the food stamp program (SNAP) and has overseen the Market Facilitation Program (bail outs for farmers smacked down by trade self-harm policy). Its a callous and amateur attempt to balance the books. Bleeding to death from self-inflicted wounds. Multiply this by however many departments are similarly rudderless and you start to get a great picture of the Art of the Deal. It is almost an art form to be this adept at making the wrong decision in any given situation.

morepork wrote:.... It is almost an art form to be this adept at making the wrong decision in any given situation.

Is this the faintest shoots of admiration for Trump mp?

I knew you'd come around eventually [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Trump shocks the world with a drastic U-turn on his stance on abortion. Really did not see this one coming. I wonder how Pence feels?

Mikey Brown wrote:Trump shocks the world with a drastic U-turn on his stance on abortion. Really did not see this one coming. I wonder how Pence feels?

What point is he even trying to make? He surely can't mean that, did he correct himself and start using words in some rational sense of order?

Dems bringing the big guns and going for obstruction of justice rather than obstruction of congress

Incredibly, or maybe not, Rudy Fuckface Gullibaws is back in Ukraine trying to fix the leaks on the conspiracy theory that appears to be the foundation for the defence against impeachment:

The president's personal attorney spent last week in Ukraine meeting with current and former officials in pursuit of damaging information about Trump's political rivals, including 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Photos posted on social media show Giuliani met during the week with a former Ukrainian diplomat who has propagated an unsubstantiated theory that Ukraine meddled to help Democrats in the 2016 election. He also huddled with a Ukrainian lawmaker who proposed a joint corruption investigation between the U.S. and Ukraine.

The meetings were documented by One America News (OAN), a conservative network that traveled with Giuliani to Ukraine.

It's unclear whether Trump was aware of Giuliani's meetings ahead of time.

"I just know he came back from someplace, and he's going to make a report, I think to the attorney general and to Congress," Trump told reporters on Saturday. "He says he has a lot of good information. I have not spoken to him about that information."


It's fucking comical.

morepork wrote:Incredibly, or maybe not, Rudy Fuckface Gullibaws is back in Ukraine trying to fix the leaks on the conspiracy theory that appears to be the foundation for the defence against impeachment:

The president's personal attorney spent last week in Ukraine meeting with current and former officials in pursuit of damaging information about Trump's political rivals, including 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Photos posted on social media show Giuliani met during the week with a former Ukrainian diplomat who has propagated an unsubstantiated theory that Ukraine meddled to help Democrats in the 2016 election. He also huddled with a Ukrainian lawmaker who proposed a joint corruption investigation between the U.S. and Ukraine.

The meetings were documented by One America News (OAN), a conservative network that traveled with Giuliani to Ukraine.

It's unclear whether Trump was aware of Giuliani's meetings ahead of time.

"I just know he came back from someplace, and he's going to make a report, I think to the attorney general and to Congress," Trump told reporters on Saturday. "He says he has a lot of good information. I have not spoken to him about that information."


It's fucking comical.

Well that's the impeachment hearings sorted then. No need to continue, and no doubt arrest warrants will be issued for the Bidens, Obamas, Clintons and Pelosi.

[emoji848]

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk