Is Trump attempting a coup?

[Barryd999]

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 4:25 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:08 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 3:23 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 2:26 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 1:48 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 1:35 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-15 4:53 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-15 4:51 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-11-15 3:38 PM

 

The irony here is literally off the scale. Watch in speechless awe what happened when the boot was on the other foot 4 years ago.

 

Trumps cronies howled themselves hoarse screaming "sore losers" because Hillary waited all of ... err ... 24 hours before she conceded to him.

 

She did not make him wait 10 days - and counting - like what he's doing to Biden. Despite the fears of fraud, illegal practice etc, she conceded THE NEXT DAY!

 

 

Karma can be a bitch eh old Bone Spurs? (lol)(lol)

 

Its nothing new though for Trump. He simply cannot handle defeat or "losing" but he loses quite a lot. Multiple bankruptcies, law suits etc but even after he loses he carries on fighting after everyone has gone home and just claims he has won or its fake news. Thats bad enough when its the loss of a business or a law suit but this is the very heart of American Democracy. Its just completely unchartered territory now. The man is deranged, unhinged and the sooner he is locked up the better.

 

Whats he doing that Al Gore didn't do ??? ... Remember Al Gore, he went on to travel the world umpteen times telling us the ills of climate change while pocketing millions of $$$$ ... Come on whats POTUS Trump and his team doing thats so different ???

 

That fight I seem to remember was over one key state that could have won the election for either Bush or Gore and both of them fought aggressively over the recounts so much so there were just 500+ votes in it I think when it was called. The networks also withdrew Florida as being called when Gore withdrew his concession statement and a recount was called.

 

The difference here is Trump is throwing about bucket loads of fake news and claims of fraud with no evidence whatsoever and the dispute is not just one state but all the key states which even if there is a recount he has no chance whatsoever of winning. All he is doing is whipping up one big conspiracy theory argument in order to sow seeds of doubt into his supporters to disrupt the presidency of Joe Biden. Well that and as I said he just cannot handle losing. The tweets that he is putting out like that one Bullet just posted are a disgrace. I am surprised Twitter allowed it. Most of his tweets are now censored or carry a fake news warning. This is the president of the United States. This is how low they have now sunk.

 

Princess ... So your saying Gore didn't accept the count and wanted a recount ??? Just like POTUS Trump is doing ... POTUS Trump has a right to question the result and he has a right to do anything legally he can do to prove what ever evidence he has regarding the count ... I presume your Government insider has told you that just one of the things being questioned the Dominion voter program hasn't made any mistakes ??? I dont recall you crying when President of the USA Barack Obama tried to influence our referendum so why are you getting all twitchy about POTUS Trump tweets that unless you follow him you dont have to read ??? ... Hate on chunky

 

He has a right to a recount if the difference is (and I think it varies from state to state) less than 1% but this isnt his only plan to try and regain the presidency. His main argument based on no evidence whatsoever is that the election was stolen from him with fraudulent mail in votes which is just preposterous. I hope they do give him the recounts and fully investigate the fraud so they can categorically state that Bidens win is 100% legitimate. However the whole world knows its just him being the worst loser in history and trying to disrupt, cause chaos and seed doubt and hopefully hobble the transition to the new President. Do you really want to be a supporter of all that?

 

The trouble is (for Trump) he is a serial liar. Its actually him that spreads the fake news. He cant stop himself from the minute he gets up to the minute he goes to bed. Serial liars and conmen are generally insecure and assume everyone else is as bad as them. Have a read of this. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2020-10-30/trump-false-claims-cnn-daniel-dale-fact-checker

 

As for his tweets well I dont follow him but its still impossible to miss them. Even his own pet network Fox News has turned against him. Carry on supporting him if you like but you will just end up looking as daft as him. Will you still be singing his praises when he gets sent down for twenty years?

 

If he has no evidence what so ever why are you getting all hot and sweaty ... As for your fact checker guff you could do that with every politician princess, even fact checker you with your false claims so stop being so bitter ... Your now telling us he'll get 20 years !!! ... Take a long look at yaself princess

 

Hot and sweaty? (lol) Are you joking? Its the best laugh I have had in ages watching Trump go into a meltdown and his demise. I dont think anyone who is still in the rational world has any doubt at all that his ridiculous attempts to claim the election was stolen from him has a one in a million chance of working in his favour. Its not me saying he will go down but plenty are speculating that he will. Thats probably another reason he is desperately trying every trick in the book to cling onto his throne. That makes him even more dangerous though IMO. There is no politician I can think of that compares to Trump in the lies and deceit stakes though. Not even Johnson. Maybe a few tinpot dictators from the past perhaps might come close. Given half a chance thats exactly what Trump would have become.

 

Well if no one believes him you'll have no issue with him doing what hes legally entitled to do then will ya ... Just like Al Gore did what he was legally entitled to do ... Your other guff reads like a Spielberg fantasy script as usual

 

Nope, I don't as I said. I would rather they proved his barmy accusations without any shadow of doubt were in fact "fake news". Otherwise it will drag on and on and on. It was his plan B of course. He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

As said though there is no comparison to Al Gore where they were both fighting over one state and the reason was that it was so close so there was a recount. There were no questions about massive voter fraud like Trump is making up now, it was about a recount as it was so close. A few hundred votes out of six million was all that was in it. Something like a 0.01% margin. There is not a single state where the vote is that close now with Biden and trump so even with a recount nothing will change. He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

[Bulletguy]

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:44 PM

 

He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

As an Ohio professor of election law said, "You can't go to court just because you don't like the vote totals," "You have to have a legal claim, and you have to have evidence to back it up. And that's just not there."

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/10/933112418/the-trump-campaign-has-had-almost-no-legal-success-this-month-heres-what-they-ve

 

The Pen one is another laugh.....they've withdrawn most of it after 'slimming down' the lawsuit. They claim Dems ''violated the law' whereas the Reps 'followed the law'. Seriously?? I think they're havin' a laugh!!

 

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-pennsylvania-lawsuits-fe4754fa7cd077d66854c724e1df91e7

[Barryd999]

Bulletguy - 2020-11-16 5:13 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:44 PM

 

He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

As an Ohio professor of election law said, "You can't go to court just because you don't like the vote totals," "You have to have a legal claim, and you have to have evidence to back it up. And that's just not there."

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/10/933112418/the-trump-campaign-has-had-almost-no-legal-success-this-month-heres-what-they-ve

 

The Pen one is another laugh.....they've withdrawn most of it after 'slimming down' the lawsuit. They claim Dems ''violated the law' whereas the Reps 'followed the law'. Seriously?? I think they're havin' a laugh!!

 

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-pennsylvania-lawsuits-fe4754fa7cd077d66854c724e1df91e7

 

Its just completely bonkers but its delicious.

 

I like this bit.

 

"A key theme of Trump and his supporters has been their claim that Philadelphia — a Democratic bastion where Trump lost badly — had not allowed Trump’s campaign representatives to watch mail-in and absentee ballots processed and tabulated.

 

However, Republican lawyers have acknowledged in a separate federal court proceeding that they had certified observers watching mail-in ballots being processed in Philadelphia. "

 

They tried to claim this in I think Georgia as well but the entire state and count was in the hands of the Republicans. (lol)

 

Its just making a mockery out of them ever claiming to be on the side of democracy. Its delicious because it finally shows up the Populist crooks for what they are. Laid open and bare for all to see. They are so "bent" they naturally assume everyone else is.

[Bulletguy]

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 5:39 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-11-16 5:13 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:44 PM

 

He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

As an Ohio professor of election law said, "You can't go to court just because you don't like the vote totals," "You have to have a legal claim, and you have to have evidence to back it up. And that's just not there."

 

https://www.npr.org/2020/11/10/933112418/the-trump-campaign-has-had-almost-no-legal-success-this-month-heres-what-they-ve

 

The Pen one is another laugh.....they've withdrawn most of it after 'slimming down' the lawsuit. They claim Dems ''violated the law' whereas the Reps 'followed the law'. Seriously?? I think they're havin' a laugh!!

 

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-pennsylvania-lawsuits-fe4754fa7cd077d66854c724e1df91e7

 

Its just completely bonkers but its delicious.

 

I like this bit.

 

"A key theme of Trump and his supporters has been their claim that Philadelphia — a Democratic bastion where Trump lost badly — had not allowed Trump’s campaign representatives to watch mail-in and absentee ballots processed and tabulated.

 

However, Republican lawyers have acknowledged in a separate federal court proceeding that they had certified observers watching mail-in ballots being processed in Philadelphia. "

 

They tried to claim this in I think Georgia as well but the entire state and count was in the hands of the Republicans. (lol)

 

Its just making a mockery out of them ever claiming to be on the side of democracy. Its delicious because it finally shows up the Populist crooks for what they are. Laid open and bare for all to see. They are so "bent" they naturally assume everyone else is.

Delicate Don even tried claiming a ballot hall in some state was open to fraudulent activity because it wasn't supervised......then someone showed it was live streaming from cctv! He just makes stuff up as he goes along and his lawyers are happy to play along with it because they know they'll get their pay cheque......maybe. As well as his wacko 'spirit guide', Paula White, I imagine he has that other fruitloop on speed dial, Alex Jones, as his 'conspiracy advisor'. Trumps cult members are his audience and they want to be entertained. They like circuses. *-)

[Birdbrain]

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:44 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 4:25 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:08 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 3:23 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 2:26 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 1:48 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 1:35 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-15 4:53 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-15 4:51 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-11-15 3:38 PM

 

The irony here is literally off the scale. Watch in speechless awe what happened when the boot was on the other foot 4 years ago.

 

Trumps cronies howled themselves hoarse screaming "sore losers" because Hillary waited all of ... err ... 24 hours before she conceded to him.

 

She did not make him wait 10 days - and counting - like what he's doing to Biden. Despite the fears of fraud, illegal practice etc, she conceded THE NEXT DAY!

 

 

Karma can be a bitch eh old Bone Spurs? (lol)(lol)

 

Its nothing new though for Trump. He simply cannot handle defeat or "losing" but he loses quite a lot. Multiple bankruptcies, law suits etc but even after he loses he carries on fighting after everyone has gone home and just claims he has won or its fake news. Thats bad enough when its the loss of a business or a law suit but this is the very heart of American Democracy. Its just completely unchartered territory now. The man is deranged, unhinged and the sooner he is locked up the better.

 

Whats he doing that Al Gore didn't do ??? ... Remember Al Gore, he went on to travel the world umpteen times telling us the ills of climate change while pocketing millions of $$$$ ... Come on whats POTUS Trump and his team doing thats so different ???

 

That fight I seem to remember was over one key state that could have won the election for either Bush or Gore and both of them fought aggressively over the recounts so much so there were just 500+ votes in it I think when it was called. The networks also withdrew Florida as being called when Gore withdrew his concession statement and a recount was called.

 

The difference here is Trump is throwing about bucket loads of fake news and claims of fraud with no evidence whatsoever and the dispute is not just one state but all the key states which even if there is a recount he has no chance whatsoever of winning. All he is doing is whipping up one big conspiracy theory argument in order to sow seeds of doubt into his supporters to disrupt the presidency of Joe Biden. Well that and as I said he just cannot handle losing. The tweets that he is putting out like that one Bullet just posted are a disgrace. I am surprised Twitter allowed it. Most of his tweets are now censored or carry a fake news warning. This is the president of the United States. This is how low they have now sunk.

 

Princess ... So your saying Gore didn't accept the count and wanted a recount ??? Just like POTUS Trump is doing ... POTUS Trump has a right to question the result and he has a right to do anything legally he can do to prove what ever evidence he has regarding the count ... I presume your Government insider has told you that just one of the things being questioned the Dominion voter program hasn't made any mistakes ??? I dont recall you crying when President of the USA Barack Obama tried to influence our referendum so why are you getting all twitchy about POTUS Trump tweets that unless you follow him you dont have to read ??? ... Hate on chunky

 

He has a right to a recount if the difference is (and I think it varies from state to state) less than 1% but this isnt his only plan to try and regain the presidency. His main argument based on no evidence whatsoever is that the election was stolen from him with fraudulent mail in votes which is just preposterous. I hope they do give him the recounts and fully investigate the fraud so they can categorically state that Bidens win is 100% legitimate. However the whole world knows its just him being the worst loser in history and trying to disrupt, cause chaos and seed doubt and hopefully hobble the transition to the new President. Do you really want to be a supporter of all that?

 

The trouble is (for Trump) he is a serial liar. Its actually him that spreads the fake news. He cant stop himself from the minute he gets up to the minute he goes to bed. Serial liars and conmen are generally insecure and assume everyone else is as bad as them. Have a read of this. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2020-10-30/trump-false-claims-cnn-daniel-dale-fact-checker

 

As for his tweets well I dont follow him but its still impossible to miss them. Even his own pet network Fox News has turned against him. Carry on supporting him if you like but you will just end up looking as daft as him. Will you still be singing his praises when he gets sent down for twenty years?

 

If he has no evidence what so ever why are you getting all hot and sweaty ... As for your fact checker guff you could do that with every politician princess, even fact checker you with your false claims so stop being so bitter ... Your now telling us he'll get 20 years !!! ... Take a long look at yaself princess

 

Hot and sweaty? (lol) Are you joking? Its the best laugh I have had in ages watching Trump go into a meltdown and his demise. I dont think anyone who is still in the rational world has any doubt at all that his ridiculous attempts to claim the election was stolen from him has a one in a million chance of working in his favour. Its not me saying he will go down but plenty are speculating that he will. Thats probably another reason he is desperately trying every trick in the book to cling onto his throne. That makes him even more dangerous though IMO. There is no politician I can think of that compares to Trump in the lies and deceit stakes though. Not even Johnson. Maybe a few tinpot dictators from the past perhaps might come close. Given half a chance thats exactly what Trump would have become.

 

Well if no one believes him you'll have no issue with him doing what hes legally entitled to do then will ya ... Just like Al Gore did what he was legally entitled to do ... Your other guff reads like a Spielberg fantasy script as usual

 

Nope, I don't as I said. I would rather they proved his barmy accusations without any shadow of doubt were in fact "fake news". Otherwise it will drag on and on and on. It was his plan B of course. He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

As said though there is no comparison to Al Gore where they were both fighting over one state and the reason was that it was so close so there was a recount. There were no questions about massive voter fraud like Trump is making up now, it was about a recount as it was so close. A few hundred votes out of six million was all that was in it. Something like a 0.01% margin. There is not a single state where the vote is that close now with Biden and trump so even with a recount nothing will change. He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

 

Oh Lordy ... Oh Lordy My ... You and your fellow haters keep on rejoicing in Didens victory ... Sad darlings

[Barryd999]

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 7:44 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:44 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 4:25 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:08 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 3:23 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 2:26 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 1:48 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 1:35 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-15 4:53 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-15 4:51 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-11-15 3:38 PM

 

The irony here is literally off the scale. Watch in speechless awe what happened when the boot was on the other foot 4 years ago.

 

Trumps cronies howled themselves hoarse screaming "sore losers" because Hillary waited all of ... err ... 24 hours before she conceded to him.

 

She did not make him wait 10 days - and counting - like what he's doing to Biden. Despite the fears of fraud, illegal practice etc, she conceded THE NEXT DAY!

 

 

Karma can be a bitch eh old Bone Spurs? (lol)(lol)

 

Its nothing new though for Trump. He simply cannot handle defeat or "losing" but he loses quite a lot. Multiple bankruptcies, law suits etc but even after he loses he carries on fighting after everyone has gone home and just claims he has won or its fake news. Thats bad enough when its the loss of a business or a law suit but this is the very heart of American Democracy. Its just completely unchartered territory now. The man is deranged, unhinged and the sooner he is locked up the better.

 

Whats he doing that Al Gore didn't do ??? ... Remember Al Gore, he went on to travel the world umpteen times telling us the ills of climate change while pocketing millions of $$$$ ... Come on whats POTUS Trump and his team doing thats so different ???

 

That fight I seem to remember was over one key state that could have won the election for either Bush or Gore and both of them fought aggressively over the recounts so much so there were just 500+ votes in it I think when it was called. The networks also withdrew Florida as being called when Gore withdrew his concession statement and a recount was called.

 

The difference here is Trump is throwing about bucket loads of fake news and claims of fraud with no evidence whatsoever and the dispute is not just one state but all the key states which even if there is a recount he has no chance whatsoever of winning. All he is doing is whipping up one big conspiracy theory argument in order to sow seeds of doubt into his supporters to disrupt the presidency of Joe Biden. Well that and as I said he just cannot handle losing. The tweets that he is putting out like that one Bullet just posted are a disgrace. I am surprised Twitter allowed it. Most of his tweets are now censored or carry a fake news warning. This is the president of the United States. This is how low they have now sunk.

 

Princess ... So your saying Gore didn't accept the count and wanted a recount ??? Just like POTUS Trump is doing ... POTUS Trump has a right to question the result and he has a right to do anything legally he can do to prove what ever evidence he has regarding the count ... I presume your Government insider has told you that just one of the things being questioned the Dominion voter program hasn't made any mistakes ??? I dont recall you crying when President of the USA Barack Obama tried to influence our referendum so why are you getting all twitchy about POTUS Trump tweets that unless you follow him you dont have to read ??? ... Hate on chunky

 

He has a right to a recount if the difference is (and I think it varies from state to state) less than 1% but this isnt his only plan to try and regain the presidency. His main argument based on no evidence whatsoever is that the election was stolen from him with fraudulent mail in votes which is just preposterous. I hope they do give him the recounts and fully investigate the fraud so they can categorically state that Bidens win is 100% legitimate. However the whole world knows its just him being the worst loser in history and trying to disrupt, cause chaos and seed doubt and hopefully hobble the transition to the new President. Do you really want to be a supporter of all that?

 

The trouble is (for Trump) he is a serial liar. Its actually him that spreads the fake news. He cant stop himself from the minute he gets up to the minute he goes to bed. Serial liars and conmen are generally insecure and assume everyone else is as bad as them. Have a read of this. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2020-10-30/trump-false-claims-cnn-daniel-dale-fact-checker

 

As for his tweets well I dont follow him but its still impossible to miss them. Even his own pet network Fox News has turned against him. Carry on supporting him if you like but you will just end up looking as daft as him. Will you still be singing his praises when he gets sent down for twenty years?

 

If he has no evidence what so ever why are you getting all hot and sweaty ... As for your fact checker guff you could do that with every politician princess, even fact checker you with your false claims so stop being so bitter ... Your now telling us he'll get 20 years !!! ... Take a long look at yaself princess

 

Hot and sweaty? (lol) Are you joking? Its the best laugh I have had in ages watching Trump go into a meltdown and his demise. I dont think anyone who is still in the rational world has any doubt at all that his ridiculous attempts to claim the election was stolen from him has a one in a million chance of working in his favour. Its not me saying he will go down but plenty are speculating that he will. Thats probably another reason he is desperately trying every trick in the book to cling onto his throne. That makes him even more dangerous though IMO. There is no politician I can think of that compares to Trump in the lies and deceit stakes though. Not even Johnson. Maybe a few tinpot dictators from the past perhaps might come close. Given half a chance thats exactly what Trump would have become.

 

Well if no one believes him you'll have no issue with him doing what hes legally entitled to do then will ya ... Just like Al Gore did what he was legally entitled to do ... Your other guff reads like a Spielberg fantasy script as usual

 

Nope, I don't as I said. I would rather they proved his barmy accusations without any shadow of doubt were in fact "fake news". Otherwise it will drag on and on and on. It was his plan B of course. He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

As said though there is no comparison to Al Gore where they were both fighting over one state and the reason was that it was so close so there was a recount. There were no questions about massive voter fraud like Trump is making up now, it was about a recount as it was so close. A few hundred votes out of six million was all that was in it. Something like a 0.01% margin. There is not a single state where the vote is that close now with Biden and trump so even with a recount nothing will change. He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

 

Oh Lordy ... Oh Lordy My ... You and your fellow haters keep on rejoicing in Didens victory ... Sad darlings

 

Well we are either rejoicing or hating, so which is it? Im a lover not a hater as you well know. Princess. (lol)

[Birdbrain]

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 10:08 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 7:44 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:44 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 4:25 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 4:08 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 3:23 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 2:26 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-16 1:48 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-16 1:35 PM

 

Birdbrain - 2020-11-15 4:53 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2020-11-15 4:51 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-11-15 3:38 PM

 

The irony here is literally off the scale. Watch in speechless awe what happened when the boot was on the other foot 4 years ago.

 

Trumps cronies howled themselves hoarse screaming "sore losers" because Hillary waited all of ... err ... 24 hours before she conceded to him.

 

She did not make him wait 10 days - and counting - like what he's doing to Biden. Despite the fears of fraud, illegal practice etc, she conceded THE NEXT DAY!

 

 

Karma can be a bitch eh old Bone Spurs? (lol)(lol)

 

Its nothing new though for Trump. He simply cannot handle defeat or "losing" but he loses quite a lot. Multiple bankruptcies, law suits etc but even after he loses he carries on fighting after everyone has gone home and just claims he has won or its fake news. Thats bad enough when its the loss of a business or a law suit but this is the very heart of American Democracy. Its just completely unchartered territory now. The man is deranged, unhinged and the sooner he is locked up the better.

 

Whats he doing that Al Gore didn't do ??? ... Remember Al Gore, he went on to travel the world umpteen times telling us the ills of climate change while pocketing millions of $$$$ ... Come on whats POTUS Trump and his team doing thats so different ???

 

That fight I seem to remember was over one key state that could have won the election for either Bush or Gore and both of them fought aggressively over the recounts so much so there were just 500+ votes in it I think when it was called. The networks also withdrew Florida as being called when Gore withdrew his concession statement and a recount was called.

 

The difference here is Trump is throwing about bucket loads of fake news and claims of fraud with no evidence whatsoever and the dispute is not just one state but all the key states which even if there is a recount he has no chance whatsoever of winning. All he is doing is whipping up one big conspiracy theory argument in order to sow seeds of doubt into his supporters to disrupt the presidency of Joe Biden. Well that and as I said he just cannot handle losing. The tweets that he is putting out like that one Bullet just posted are a disgrace. I am surprised Twitter allowed it. Most of his tweets are now censored or carry a fake news warning. This is the president of the United States. This is how low they have now sunk.

 

Princess ... So your saying Gore didn't accept the count and wanted a recount ??? Just like POTUS Trump is doing ... POTUS Trump has a right to question the result and he has a right to do anything legally he can do to prove what ever evidence he has regarding the count ... I presume your Government insider has told you that just one of the things being questioned the Dominion voter program hasn't made any mistakes ??? I dont recall you crying when President of the USA Barack Obama tried to influence our referendum so why are you getting all twitchy about POTUS Trump tweets that unless you follow him you dont have to read ??? ... Hate on chunky

 

He has a right to a recount if the difference is (and I think it varies from state to state) less than 1% but this isnt his only plan to try and regain the presidency. His main argument based on no evidence whatsoever is that the election was stolen from him with fraudulent mail in votes which is just preposterous. I hope they do give him the recounts and fully investigate the fraud so they can categorically state that Bidens win is 100% legitimate. However the whole world knows its just him being the worst loser in history and trying to disrupt, cause chaos and seed doubt and hopefully hobble the transition to the new President. Do you really want to be a supporter of all that?

 

The trouble is (for Trump) he is a serial liar. Its actually him that spreads the fake news. He cant stop himself from the minute he gets up to the minute he goes to bed. Serial liars and conmen are generally insecure and assume everyone else is as bad as them. Have a read of this. https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2020-10-30/trump-false-claims-cnn-daniel-dale-fact-checker

 

As for his tweets well I dont follow him but its still impossible to miss them. Even his own pet network Fox News has turned against him. Carry on supporting him if you like but you will just end up looking as daft as him. Will you still be singing his praises when he gets sent down for twenty years?

 

If he has no evidence what so ever why are you getting all hot and sweaty ... As for your fact checker guff you could do that with every politician princess, even fact checker you with your false claims so stop being so bitter ... Your now telling us he'll get 20 years !!! ... Take a long look at yaself princess

 

Hot and sweaty? (lol) Are you joking? Its the best laugh I have had in ages watching Trump go into a meltdown and his demise. I dont think anyone who is still in the rational world has any doubt at all that his ridiculous attempts to claim the election was stolen from him has a one in a million chance of working in his favour. Its not me saying he will go down but plenty are speculating that he will. Thats probably another reason he is desperately trying every trick in the book to cling onto his throne. That makes him even more dangerous though IMO. There is no politician I can think of that compares to Trump in the lies and deceit stakes though. Not even Johnson. Maybe a few tinpot dictators from the past perhaps might come close. Given half a chance thats exactly what Trump would have become.

 

Well if no one believes him you'll have no issue with him doing what hes legally entitled to do then will ya ... Just like Al Gore did what he was legally entitled to do ... Your other guff reads like a Spielberg fantasy script as usual

 

Nope, I don't as I said. I would rather they proved his barmy accusations without any shadow of doubt were in fact "fake news". Otherwise it will drag on and on and on. It was his plan B of course. He started fabricating nonsense about the mail voting system being fraudulent well in advance of the election despite there being no evidence to show it was.

 

As said though there is no comparison to Al Gore where they were both fighting over one state and the reason was that it was so close so there was a recount. There were no questions about massive voter fraud like Trump is making up now, it was about a recount as it was so close. A few hundred votes out of six million was all that was in it. Something like a 0.01% margin. There is not a single state where the vote is that close now with Biden and trump so even with a recount nothing will change. He should do the decent thing and concede rather than inventing stories of fraud and demanding a recount in states where it will make no difference whatsoever. Of course doing the decent thing is not what he is about. He will just want to create as much division as possible until the very last.

 

Oh Lordy ... Oh Lordy My ... You and your fellow haters keep on rejoicing in Didens victory ... Sad darlings

 

Well we are either rejoicing or hating, so which is it? Im a lover not a hater as you well know. Princess. (lol)

 

Keep on rejoicing sweet cheeks ... Its funny watching the squad trying to remember desperately how to be happy

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

 

1........Is she not the President?........

 

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

 

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

 

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

 

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 8:53 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

1........Is she not the President?........

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

1 Read your link. The "style" is president, the role is chief executive. It is a title. She chairs the meetings of the European Commission. There is no equivalence between the powers she could wield and those of the President of the USA, or even those of a British PM. She does not "run" the EU, no one individual does.

 

2 That merely substitutes the semantics of a paranoid, Germanophobic, mind for simple, easily verifiable facts. It is flat wrong.

 

3 Yawn - read your own link! Yes. Her appointment to the Commission was confirmed by the Parliament on 16 July 2019. Your Wiki records that. Just read it. She had previously been an elected member of the German Federal Government minister since 2005. See here: https://tinyurl.com/ycr4lnsd (Which I suspect you also won't read!)

 

4 Yes, because they can reject the commission's choice of candidate. Again, read your own link.

 

5 It is, in fact, highly democratic, but it works through tiers of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. Something you just don't seem to understand, refuse to admit to understanding, or simply can't understand. Which is odd, considering you wanted Brexit to liberate Britain from the influence of the EU and to return powers to our own, representative, parliament.

 

Why is trying to explain the reasonably clear and obvious contents of your own Wiki link to you akin to navigating the seven circles of hell? There must be a reason. Politeness forbids me from naming it! :-D

[Bulletguy]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-17 12:27 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 8:53 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

1........Is she not the President?........

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

1 Read your link. The "style" is president, the role is chief executive. It is a title. She chairs the meetings of the European Commission. There is no equivalence between the powers she could wield and those of the President of the USA, or even those of a British PM. She does not "run" the EU, no one individual does.

 

2 That merely substitutes the semantics of a paranoid, Germanophobic, mind for simple, easily verifiable facts. It is flat wrong.

 

3 Yawn - read your own link! Yes. Her appointment to the Commission was confirmed by the Parliament on 16 July 2019. Your Wiki records that. Just read it. She had previously been an elected member of the German Federal Government minister since 2005. See here: https://tinyurl.com/ycr4lnsd (Which I suspect you also won't read!)

 

4 Yes, because they can reject the commission's choice of candidate. Again, read your own link.

 

5 It is, in fact, highly democratic, but it works through tiers of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. Something you just don't seem to understand, refuse to admit to understanding, or simply can't understand. Which is odd, considering you wanted Brexit to liberate Britain from the influence of the EU and to return powers to our own, representative, parliament.

 

Why is trying to explain the reasonably clear and obvious contents of your own Wiki link to you akin to navigating the seven circles of hell? There must be a reason. Politeness forbids me from naming it! :-D

He's desperate to bury the thread as he ran off after posting a couple of minutes ago!

[Guest pelmetman]

Bulletguy - 2020-11-17 6:35 PM

 

He's desperate to bury the thread as he ran off after posting a couple of minutes ago!

 

Run off??? :-S ........

 

Some of us have a life Bullet Liar ;-) .......

 

If I were you I'd try and get one before it's toooo late >:-) .......

 

Just sayin :D .........

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 7:02 PM

 

Bulletguy - 2020-11-17 6:35 PM

 

He's desperate to bury the thread as he ran off after posting a couple of minutes ago!

 

Run off??? :-S ........

Yes.......you're trying to ignore Brians post hoping the thread will get buried because he's got you well skewered! (lol)

 

edit; Ah i see why you've come back in now!! (lol)(lol)

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-17 12:27 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 8:53 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

1........Is she not the President?........

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

1 Read your link. The "style" is president, the role is chief executive. It is a title. She chairs the meetings of the European Commission. There is no equivalence between the powers she could wield and those of the President of the USA, or even those of a British PM. She does not "run" the EU, no one individual does.

 

2 That merely substitutes the semantics of a paranoid, Germanophobic, mind for simple, easily verifiable facts. It is flat wrong.

 

3 Yawn - read your own link! Yes. Her appointment to the Commission was confirmed by the Parliament on 16 July 2019. Your Wiki records that. Just read it. She had previously been an elected member of the German Federal Government minister since 2005. See here: https://tinyurl.com/ycr4lnsd (Which I suspect you also won't read!)

 

4 Yes, because they can reject the commission's choice of candidate. Again, read your own link.

 

5 It is, in fact, highly democratic, but it works through tiers of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. Something you just don't seem to understand, refuse to admit to understanding, or simply can't understand. Which is odd, considering you wanted Brexit to liberate Britain from the influence of the EU and to return powers to our own, representative, parliament.

 

Why is trying to explain the reasonably clear and obvious contents of your own Wiki link to you akin to navigating the seven circles of hell? There must be a reason. Politeness forbids me from naming it! :-D

 

1.....Giggle.....President in "Style only" that's a bit cruel init..... Brian? (lol) (lol) (lol) ........

 

2.....Germanphobic or Realist ;-) .........

 

3.....Still ignoring the FACT that she was the only candidate put forward by the Frau Merkel :D .......

 

4......Yeah like a Parliament of bottom lickers will refuse to lick their top bottom >:-) ........

 

5.......HAHAHAHAHAHAHA (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........Ooooh I'm so sorely tempted for a Muttely attachment ;-) .......

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 7:10 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-17 12:27 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 8:53 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

1........Is she not the President?........

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

1 Read your link. The "style" is president, the role is chief executive. It is a title. She chairs the meetings of the European Commission. There is no equivalence between the powers she could wield and those of the President of the USA, or even those of a British PM. She does not "run" the EU, no one individual does.

 

2 That merely substitutes the semantics of a paranoid, Germanophobic, mind for simple, easily verifiable facts. It is flat wrong.

 

3 Yawn - read your own link! Yes. Her appointment to the Commission was confirmed by the Parliament on 16 July 2019. Your Wiki records that. Just read it. She had previously been an elected member of the German Federal Government minister since 2005. See here: https://tinyurl.com/ycr4lnsd (Which I suspect you also won't read!)

 

4 Yes, because they can reject the commission's choice of candidate. Again, read your own link.

 

5 It is, in fact, highly democratic, but it works through tiers of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. Something you just don't seem to understand, refuse to admit to understanding, or simply can't understand. Which is odd, considering you wanted Brexit to liberate Britain from the influence of the EU and to return powers to our own, representative, parliament.

 

Why is trying to explain the reasonably clear and obvious contents of your own Wiki link to you akin to navigating the seven circles of hell? There must be a reason. Politeness forbids me from naming it! :-D

 

1.....Giggle.....President in "Style only" that's a bit cruel init..... Brian? (lol) (lol) (lol) ........

 

2.....Germanphobic or Realist ;-) .........

 

3.....Still ignoring the FACT that she was the only candidate put forward by the Frau Merkel :D .......

 

4......Yeah like a Parliament of bottom lickers will refuse to lick their top bottom >:-) ........

 

5.......HAHAHAHAHAHAHA (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........Ooooh I'm so sorely tempted for a Muttely attachment ;-) .......

Your "replies" are all nonsensical gibberish that must have come from a two year old. Why don't you do as Brian keeps telling you and READ the link you posted?

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 7:10 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-17 12:27 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 8:53 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

1........Is she not the President?........

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

1 Read your link. The "style" is president, the role is chief executive. It is a title. She chairs the meetings of the European Commission. There is no equivalence between the powers she could wield and those of the President of the USA, or even those of a British PM. She does not "run" the EU, no one individual does.

2 That merely substitutes the semantics of a paranoid, Germanophobic, mind for simple, easily verifiable facts. It is flat wrong.

3 Yawn - read your own link! Yes. Her appointment to the Commission was confirmed by the Parliament on 16 July 2019. Your Wiki records that. Just read it. She had previously been an elected member of the German Federal Government minister since 2005. See here: https://tinyurl.com/ycr4lnsd (Which I suspect you also won't read!)

4 Yes, because they can reject the commission's choice of candidate. Again, read your own link.

5 It is, in fact, highly democratic, but it works through tiers of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. Something you just don't seem to understand, refuse to admit to understanding, or simply can't understand. Which is odd, considering you wanted Brexit to liberate Britain from the influence of the EU and to return powers to our own, representative, parliament.

Why is trying to explain the reasonably clear and obvious contents of your own Wiki link to you akin to navigating the seven circles of hell? There must be a reason. Politeness forbids me from naming it! :-D

1.....Giggle.....President in "Style only" that's a bit cruel init..... Brian? (lol) (lol) (lol) ........

2.....Germanphobic or Realist ;-) .........

3.....Still ignoring the FACT that she was the only candidate put forward by the Frau Merkel :D .......

4......Yeah like a Parliament of bottom lickers will refuse to lick their top bottom >:-) ........

5.......HAHAHAHAHAHAHA (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........Ooooh I'm so sorely tempted for a Muttely attachment ;-) .......

1 Well, that's whet you Wiki says. You should have read it before you put in the link.

2 In your case, ferom long standing, the former. 'Though you've never managed to explain why.

3 She first had to be elected to the Council by the Parliament, which can decide whether to accept, or reject, the nomination. Anyway, we are no longer in the EU, so what is your objection to a highly intelligent woman becoming president of the Commission? It's none of your business now, is it?

4 Same true for UK parliament? Large Conservative majority, Conservative selected MPs, Conservative elected leader/PM, Conservative appointed Cabinet, multiple cock-ups, demonstrable incompetence. Result? Mild expressions of disquiet from the few with functioning biians.

5 As I said, you don't understand representative democracy. Beats me why you wanted Brexit in order to merely swap one form of representative democracy for another.

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-18 1:14 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 7:10 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-17 12:27 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-17 8:53 AM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-16 1:01 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-15 3:58 PM...........................

1 Is she not the President of the EU? ;-) .........

2 That EU that seeks to turn European nations into a Federation of vassal states of the Fourth Reich *-) ........

3 The obvious difference is the Yank voters had a choice of TWO :D ........

4 Along with the FACT that no European voter got to vote for their President 8-) .........

5 AND you'd call that Democracy???........You're avin a Giraffe aintcha >:-) .........

1 So you didn't read it, did you? All the answers to your questions are in the Wiki you linked. But, as ever, you prefer not to know.

2 That EU has only the powers its member states give it, and it does not have that power. Pelmet paranoia speaks!

3 Read your own Wiki.

4 Oh yes they did. All who voted for her were European voters. Read your own Wiki.

5 It is a democratic process. Read your own Wiki.

1........Is she not the President?........

2........Incorrect, the EU only has the power the Fourth Reich and its toady's allows it to have..........

3........Did the EU Parliament have a choice of candidates?........NO.......

4........Did the voters MEP's have a choice of Candidates?.........NO.......

5........Democratic process my a*se (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........

1 Read your link. The "style" is president, the role is chief executive. It is a title. She chairs the meetings of the European Commission. There is no equivalence between the powers she could wield and those of the President of the USA, or even those of a British PM. She does not "run" the EU, no one individual does.

2 That merely substitutes the semantics of a paranoid, Germanophobic, mind for simple, easily verifiable facts. It is flat wrong.

3 Yawn - read your own link! Yes. Her appointment to the Commission was confirmed by the Parliament on 16 July 2019. Your Wiki records that. Just read it. She had previously been an elected member of the German Federal Government minister since 2005. See here: https://tinyurl.com/ycr4lnsd (Which I suspect you also won't read!)

4 Yes, because they can reject the commission's choice of candidate. Again, read your own link.

5 It is, in fact, highly democratic, but it works through tiers of representative democracy, rather than direct democracy. Something you just don't seem to understand, refuse to admit to understanding, or simply can't understand. Which is odd, considering you wanted Brexit to liberate Britain from the influence of the EU and to return powers to our own, representative, parliament.

Why is trying to explain the reasonably clear and obvious contents of your own Wiki link to you akin to navigating the seven circles of hell? There must be a reason. Politeness forbids me from naming it! :-D

1.....Giggle.....President in "Style only" that's a bit cruel init..... Brian? (lol) (lol) (lol) ........

2.....Germanphobic or Realist ;-) .........

3.....Still ignoring the FACT that she was the only candidate put forward by the Frau Merkel :D .......

4......Yeah like a Parliament of bottom lickers will refuse to lick their top bottom >:-) ........

5.......HAHAHAHAHAHAHA (lol) (lol) (lol) ..........Ooooh I'm so sorely tempted for a Muttely attachment ;-) .......

1 Well, that's whet you Wiki says. You should have read it before you put in the link.

2 In your case, ferom long standing, the former. 'Though you've never managed to explain why.

3 She first had to be elected to the Council by the Parliament, which can decide whether to accept, or reject, the nomination. Anyway, we are no longer in the EU, so what is your objection to a highly intelligent woman becoming president of the Commission? It's none of your business now, is it?

4 Same true for UK parliament? Large Conservative majority, Conservative selected MPs, Conservative elected leader/PM, Conservative appointed Cabinet, multiple cock-ups, demonstrable incompetence. Result? Mild expressions of disquiet from the few with functioning biians.

5 As I said, you don't understand representative democracy. Beats me why you wanted Brexit in order to merely swap one form of representative democracy for another.

 

1.......It also says this....."In February 2008, President Barroso admitted that despite the president having in theory as much legitimacy as heads of governments, in practice it was not the case. The low voter turnout creates a problem for the president's legitimacy,"

 

Even the EU accepts their President is illegitimate (lol) .........

 

2.......Simples.......I don't like German Empire building for historical reasons ;-) .........

 

3.......Correct its none of OUR buisness now >:-) ........

 

4.......Hogwash......I as a member of Joe Public was able to join the Tory party and vote for our leader B-) ........Can the European public vote directly for anyone on the EU Commission or the President?.....NO! *-) .....

 

5......Oh I understand representative democracy very well ;-) .........It's as democratic as Communism *-).........

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2020-11-19 9:29 AM

..............................................................

1.......It also says this....."In February 2008, President Barroso admitted that despite the president having in theory as much legitimacy as heads of governments, in practice it was not the case. The low voter turnout creates a problem for the president's legitimacy,"

Even the EU accepts their President is illegitimate (lol) .........

2.......Simples.......I don't like German Empire building for historical reasons ;-) .........

3.......Correct its none of OUR buisness now >:-) ........

4.......Hogwash......I as a member of Joe Public was able to join the Tory party and vote for our leader B-) ........Can the European public vote directly for anyone on the EU Commission or the President?.....NO! *-) .....

5......Oh I understand representative democracy very well ;-) .........It's as democratic as Communism *-).........

1 2008!! The system changed in 2014, and further changes are under discussion at present, all intended to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the role. As with all the EUs institutions, it is in a constant state of revision and refinement. That is inevitable as membership, and interests, change.

2 I think we know that! Still don't understand what Germany has done to you though, to justify that prejudice.

3 Quite, so why are you fussing on?

4 All you did was vote for a leader of a party, not the leader of a country. That vote was for party members only, not for the UK electorate. That sounds a bit like a Chinese Communist party election to me! :-D

5 Then why post this:

pelmetman - 2020-11-13 8:51 PM

..................Democracy seems to work fine from where I'm sat >:-) ...........

What you're arguing for is direct democracy, not representative democracy. Fine, but why not say so?

 

IMO, it is an unworkable idea - unless there are exams to assess the voting adequacy of each individual elector to ensure they have a full understanding of the relevant issues. Otherwise, you end up with election by rumour, disinformation, and manipulation. Hardly an advance, is it?

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-19 1:08 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-19 9:29 AM

..............................................................

1.......It also says this....."In February 2008, President Barroso admitted that despite the president having in theory as much legitimacy as heads of governments, in practice it was not the case. The low voter turnout creates a problem for the president's legitimacy,"

Even the EU accepts their President is illegitimate (lol) .........

2.......Simples.......I don't like German Empire building for historical reasons ;-) .........

3.......Correct its none of OUR buisness now >:-) ........

4.......Hogwash......I as a member of Joe Public was able to join the Tory party and vote for our leader B-) ........Can the European public vote directly for anyone on the EU Commission or the President?.....NO! *-) .....

5......Oh I understand representative democracy very well ;-) .........It's as democratic as Communism *-).........

1 2008!! The system changed in 2014, and further changes are under discussion at present, all intended to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the role. As with all the EUs institutions, it is in a constant state of revision and refinement. That is inevitable as membership, and interests, change.

2 I think we know that! Still don't understand what Germany has done to you though, to justify that prejudice.

3 Quite, so why are you fussing on?

4 All you did was vote for a leader of a party, not the leader of a country. That vote was for party members only, not for the UK electorate. That sounds a bit like a Chinese Communist party election to me! :-D

5 Then why post this:

pelmetman - 2020-11-13 8:51 PM

..................Democracy seems to work fine from where I'm sat >:-) ...........

What you're arguing for is direct democracy, not representative democracy. Fine, but why not say so?

 

IMO, it is an unworkable idea - unless there are exams to assess the voting adequacy of each individual elector to ensure they have a full understanding of the relevant issues. Otherwise, you end up with election by rumour, disinformation, and manipulation. Hardly an advance, is it?

 

1.........Can Europeans vote for their EU President?........NO >:-) ........

 

2.........Germany hasn't done anything to me personally........But it's done untold damage to many Southern EU countries *-) .........

 

3.........So why are you still defending the EU? :D..........

 

4.........But I HAD the opportunity to vote for the leader of the Tory party.......Did anyone in Europe HAVE the opportunity to vote for their President?.......NO >:-) ...........

 

5.........Piffle......If Europeans can vote for a MEP there is no reason why they cant vote for their President..........But that would be democratic.......and the Fourth Reich doesn't like other countries having a democratic voice do they? (lol) ...........

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2020-11-19 1:24 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-19 1:08 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-19 9:29 AM

.............................................................

1.......It also says this....."In February 2008, President Barroso admitted that despite the president having in theory as much legitimacy as heads of governments, in practice it was not the case. The low voter turnout creates a problem for the president's legitimacy,"

Even the EU accepts their President is illegitimate (lol) .........

2.......Simples.......I don't like German Empire building for historical reasons ;-) .........

3.......Correct its none of OUR buisness now >:-) ........

4.......Hogwash......I as a member of Joe Public was able to join the Tory party and vote for our leader B-) ........Can the European public vote directly for anyone on the EU Commission or the President?.....NO! *-) .....

5......Oh I understand representative democracy very well ;-) .........It's as democratic as Communism *-).........

1 2008!! The system changed in 2014, and further changes are under discussion at present, all intended to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the role. As with all the EUs institutions, it is in a constant state of revision and refinement. That is inevitable as membership, and interests, change.

2 I think we know that! Still don't understand what Germany has done to you though, to justify that prejudice.

3 Quite, so why are you fussing on?

4 All you did was vote for a leader of a party, not the leader of a country. That vote was for party members only, not for the UK electorate. That sounds a bit like a Chinese Communist party election to me! :-D

5 Then why post this:

pelmetman - 2020-11-13 8:51 PM

..................Democracy seems to work fine from where I'm sat >:-) ...........

What you're arguing for is direct democracy, not representative democracy. Fine, but why not say so?

 

IMO, it is an unworkable idea - unless there are exams to assess the voting adequacy of each individual elector to ensure they have a full understanding of the relevant issues. Otherwise, you end up with election by rumour, disinformation, and manipulation. Hardly an advance, is it?

1.........Can Europeans vote for their EU President?........NO >:-) ........

2.........Germany hasn't done anything to me personally........But it's done untold damage to many Southern EU countries *-) .........

3.........So why are you still defending the EU? :D..........

4.........But I HAD the opportunity to vote for the leader of the Tory party.......Did anyone in Europe HAVE the opportunity to vote for their President?.......NO >:-) ...........

5.........Piffle......If Europeans can vote for a MEP there is no reason why they cant vote for their President..........But that would be democratic.......and the Fourth Reich doesn't like other countries having a democratic voice do they? (lol) ...........

It would help no end if you said what you actually mean!

1 Who, if not Europeans, do you think votes for any of the EU Presidents? Martians?? See what I mean? :-D

2 How?

3 I'm not "defending" it. I think it is a necessary institution that will, in time, become the salvation of its member states in a world dominated by other, more powerful, political and economic blocs. It is the counter to those other blocs, which will otherwise play divide and rule, or use their superior economic power and influence against the interests of, or to coerce, those other smaller states. Historically, nation states evolved from tribes or clans who realised that endlessly fighting among themselves was not to their collective advantage. All the European states whose evolution I'm aware of evolved in this way. The EU is merely a continuation of that process, facilitated by improved land, sea, and air communication. I think it is an inevitable process, and those who reject it will decline to the point at which they become absorbed into, or subjugated by, the larger blocs.

4 Back to No 1. But consider what powers such a person would then have if directly elected. And you'd prefer that?

5 Really? This is Germanophobia, not fact, or reason, talking. Where/when did Germany deny other countries their democratic voice? Besides, people do not vote for their MEPs (they vote for than more than one MEP) as Europeans, they vote as citizens of France, Spain, Italy etc.

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-19 3:50 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-19 1:24 PM

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-19 1:08 PM

pelmetman - 2020-11-19 9:29 AM

.............................................................

1.......It also says this....."In February 2008, President Barroso admitted that despite the president having in theory as much legitimacy as heads of governments, in practice it was not the case. The low voter turnout creates a problem for the president's legitimacy,"

Even the EU accepts their President is illegitimate (lol) .........

2.......Simples.......I don't like German Empire building for historical reasons ;-) .........

3.......Correct its none of OUR buisness now >:-) ........

4.......Hogwash......I as a member of Joe Public was able to join the Tory party and vote for our leader B-) ........Can the European public vote directly for anyone on the EU Commission or the President?.....NO! *-) .....

5......Oh I understand representative democracy very well ;-) .........It's as democratic as Communism *-).........

1 2008!! The system changed in 2014, and further changes are under discussion at present, all intended to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the role. As with all the EUs institutions, it is in a constant state of revision and refinement. That is inevitable as membership, and interests, change.

2 I think we know that! Still don't understand what Germany has done to you though, to justify that prejudice.

3 Quite, so why are you fussing on?

4 All you did was vote for a leader of a party, not the leader of a country. That vote was for party members only, not for the UK electorate. That sounds a bit like a Chinese Communist party election to me! :-D

5 Then why post this:

pelmetman - 2020-11-13 8:51 PM

..................Democracy seems to work fine from where I'm sat >:-) ...........

What you're arguing for is direct democracy, not representative democracy. Fine, but why not say so?

 

IMO, it is an unworkable idea - unless there are exams to assess the voting adequacy of each individual elector to ensure they have a full understanding of the relevant issues. Otherwise, you end up with election by rumour, disinformation, and manipulation. Hardly an advance, is it?

1.........Can Europeans vote for their EU President?........NO >:-) ........

2.........Germany hasn't done anything to me personally........But it's done untold damage to many Southern EU countries *-) .........

3.........So why are you still defending the EU? :D..........

4.........But I HAD the opportunity to vote for the leader of the Tory party.......Did anyone in Europe HAVE the opportunity to vote for their President?.......NO >:-) ...........

5.........Piffle......If Europeans can vote for a MEP there is no reason why they cant vote for their President..........But that would be democratic.......and the Fourth Reich doesn't like other countries having a democratic voice do they? (lol) ...........

It would help no end if you said what you actually mean!

1 Who, if not Europeans, do you think votes for any of the EU Presidents? Martians?? See what I mean? :-D

2 How?

3 I'm not "defending" it. I think it is a necessary institution that will, in time, become the salvation of its member states in a world dominated by other, more powerful, political and economic blocs. It is the counter to those other blocs, which will otherwise play divide and rule, or use their superior economic power and influence against the interests of, or to coerce, those other smaller states. Historically, nation states evolved from tribes or clans who realised that endlessly fighting among themselves was not to their collective advantage. All the European states whose evolution I'm aware of evolved in this way. The EU is merely a continuation of that process, facilitated by improved land, sea, and air communication. I think it is an inevitable process, and those who reject it will decline to the point at which they become absorbed into, or subjugated by, the larger blocs.

4 Back to No 1. But consider what powers such a person would then have if directly elected. And you'd prefer that?

5 Really? This is Germanophobia, not fact, or reason, talking. Where/when did Germany deny other countries their democratic voice? Besides, people do not vote for their MEPs (they vote for than more than one MEP) as Europeans, they vote as citizens of France, Spain, Italy etc.

 

1.......Can Europeans vote directly for their President?.......NO........Can their MEP's choose who their President is?.........NO.........All they can do is rubber stamp the decisions of the Fourth Reich >:-) .......

 

2.......Are not many the Southern EU economies now basketcase economies dependent on handouts from their Fourth Reich owners? ;-) .........

 

3.......Eh?........So what have you doing for your last umpteen posts? *-) ..........

 

4.......I prefer Democracy to hypocrisy which is why I voted to Leave B-) .........

 

5........Germaphobia based on FACT ;-) ........Who did Cameron go cap in hand too?.........Who has all the top jobs in the EU?.........Who is demanding EU countries sort out her Migration problem.......Germany & Merkel (lol) (lol) (lol) ...........

 

6.........Hopefully Poland & Hungary will help bring the Fourth Reich down >:-) ..........I did my bit by voting for BREXIT B-) .........

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2020-11-20 9:54 AM........................................

1.......a) Can Europeans vote directly for their President?.......NO

b) Can their MEP's choose who their President is?.........NO.........All they can do is rubber stamp the decisions of the Fourth Reich >:-) .......

2.......Are not many the Southern EU economies now basketcase economies dependent on handouts from their Fourth Reich owners? ;-) .........

3.......Eh?........So what have you doing for your last umpteen posts? *-) ..........

4.......I prefer Democracy to hypocrisy which is why I voted to Leave B-) .........

5........Germaphobia based on FACT ;-) ........Who did Cameron go cap in hand too?.........Who has all the top jobs in the EU?.........Who is demanding EU countries sort out her Migration problem.......Germany & Merkel (lol) (lol) (lol) ...........

6.........Hopefully Poland & Hungary will help bring the Fourth Reich down >:-) ..........I did my bit by voting for BREXIT B-) .........

1 a) Correct, but so what? 1 b) Correct, but they can reject any candidate put forward by the commission - which then requires the submission of a different candidate. I think that is reasonable.

 

2 Not that I am aware of. Which countries have you in mind, and why and how are they in that position?

 

3 Arguing in favour of something is not the same as "defending" it. The EU is not perfect, and doubtless never will be. If I agree with criticisms I say so. But then, is the UK, or any state or confederation perfect? The point is that the imperfections can, over time, and with agreement, be remedied. Baby with bathwater argument, IMO.

 

4 The appointments are all, in varying ways, made, or confirmed, by either the MEPs or the elected Heads of State or government of the member states, all of whom are elected, in varying ways, by the citizens of the member states. What, actually, is wrong with that? A UK PM appoints the members of his cabinet. We don't elect his ministers, just the MPs from among whom he chooses. No-one elects members of the HoL. No-one elects government SPADS. No-one elects our head of state. There is hypocrisy in criticising democratic standards elsewhere, when unquestioningly accepting similar (or lower) democratic standards at home.

 

5 Prejudice speaking!! :-D Whether Cameron went "cap in hand" or merely approached the most influential head of state as the best place to start, is not a fact, it is a judgement. OTOH, who do you think he should have started with? One of the smallest, least influential, states presumably?

 

OK, since you're relying on facts, the top EU jobs are defined as:

1 The President of the European Council (collectively, the EU Heads of State) - (Nominated by the Council and elected by MEPs)

2 The President of the European Commission - the Civil Service (Appointed by the European Council)

3 The President of the European Central Bank (Appointed by the European Council)

4 The High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security - the EU Foreign Secretary (Appointed by the European Council)

5 The President of the European Parliament (Nominated by the Council and elected by MEPs)

 

Present holders are:

1 Charles Michel (Belgium)

2 Ursula von der Leyen (Germany)

3 Christene Lagarde (France)

4 Josep Borrell (Spain)

5 David Sassoli (Italy).

I don't see the German dominance. Whose "facts are you using, or did you just forget to check before sounding off? :-D

 

6 You do realise that Germany was a founder member of the European Coal and Steel Community ECSC) in 1951 (which in 1957 became the European Economic Cummunity (EEC), which in 1993 became the European Union) with just five initial members. Poland and Hungary (who both joined in 2004) don't have a cat in hell's chance of pulling down Germany, or the EU - all they could do is leave which, as they share borders with Russia (their old "friend"), and are economically dependent on the EU for their development, would be an act of self harm for them exceeding even that of Brexit for us (and they know it)! Dream on, Baby! :-D

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-21 5:37 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-20 9:54 AM........................................

1.......a) Can Europeans vote directly for their President?.......NO

b) Can their MEP's choose who their President is?.........NO.........All they can do is rubber stamp the decisions of the Fourth Reich >:-) .......

2.......Are not many the Southern EU economies now basketcase economies dependent on handouts from their Fourth Reich owners? ;-) .........

3.......Eh?........So what have you doing for your last umpteen posts? *-) ..........

4.......I prefer Democracy to hypocrisy which is why I voted to Leave B-) .........

5........Germaphobia based on FACT ;-) ........Who did Cameron go cap in hand too?.........Who has all the top jobs in the EU?.........Who is demanding EU countries sort out her Migration problem.......Germany & Merkel (lol) (lol) (lol) ...........

6.........Hopefully Poland & Hungary will help bring the Fourth Reich down >:-) ..........I did my bit by voting for BREXIT B-) .........

1 a) Correct, but so what? 1 b) Correct, but they can reject any candidate put forward by the commission - which then requires the submission of a different candidate. I think that is reasonable.

 

2 Not that I am aware of. Which countries have you in mind, and why and how are they in that position?

 

3 Arguing in favour of something is not the same as "defending" it. The EU is not perfect, and doubtless never will be. If I agree with criticisms I say so. But then, is the UK, or any state or confederation perfect? The point is that the imperfections can, over time, and with agreement, be remedied. Baby with bathwater argument, IMO.

 

4 The appointments are all, in varying ways, made, or confirmed, by either the MEPs or the elected Heads of State or government of the member states, all of whom are elected, in varying ways, by the citizens of the member states. What, actually, is wrong with that? A UK PM appoints the members of his cabinet. We don't elect his ministers, just the MPs from among whom he chooses. No-one elects members of the HoL. No-one elects government SPADS. No-one elects our head of state. There is hypocrisy in criticising democratic standards elsewhere, when unquestioningly accepting similar (or lower) democratic standards at home.

 

5 Prejudice speaking!! :-D Whether Cameron went "cap in hand" or merely approached the most influential head of state as the best place to start, is not a fact, it is a judgement. OTOH, who do you think he should have started with? One of the smallest, least influential, states presumably?

 

OK, since you're relying on facts, the top EU jobs are defined as:

1 The President of the European Council (collectively, the EU Heads of State) - (Nominated by the Council and elected by MEPs)

2 The President of the European Commission - the Civil Service (Appointed by the European Council)

3 The President of the European Central Bank (Appointed by the European Council)

4 The High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security - the EU Foreign Secretary (Appointed by the European Council)

5 The President of the European Parliament (Nominated by the Council and elected by MEPs)

 

Present holders are:

1 Charles Michel (Belgium)

2 Ursula von der Leyen (Germany)

3 Christene Lagarde (France)

4 Josep Borrell (Spain)

5 David Sassoli (Italy).

I don't see the German dominance. Whose "facts are you using, or did you just forget to check before sounding off? :-D

 

6 You do realise that Germany was a founder member of the European Coal and Steel Community ECSC) in 1951 (which in 1957 became the European Economic Cummunity (EEC), which in 1993 became the European Union) with just five initial members. Poland and Hungary (who both joined in 2004) don't have a cat in hell's chance of pulling down Germany, or the EU - all they could do is leave which, as they share borders with Russia (their old "friend"), and are economically dependent on the EU for their development, would be an act of self harm for them exceeding even that of Brexit for us (and they know it)! Dream on, Baby! :-D

 

Give it up Brian ;-) ........

 

You have lost :D ........

 

I'd rather bugger myself with my bog brush than reply to your Blah Blah Blah 8-) .......

 

At least it would stop my Farmer Giles from itching for a while :D ........

[Brian Kirby]

pelmetman - 2020-11-21 6:04 PM..............................

Give it up Brian ;-) ........

You have lost :D ........

I'd rather bugger myself with my bog brush than reply to your Blah Blah Blah 8-) .......

At least it would stop my Farmer Giles from itching for a while :D ........

As I thought, you are suffering from an allergy to facts. That is what causes the itching, especially, I hear, after mis-use of the toilet brush. I'll leave you to your un-natural pleasures then! :-D

[Guest pelmetman]

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-21 6:45 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-21 6:04 PM..............................

Give it up Brian ;-) ........

You have lost :D ........

I'd rather bugger myself with my bog brush than reply to your Blah Blah Blah 8-) .......

At least it would stop my Farmer Giles from itching for a while :D ........

As I thought, you are suffering from an allergy to facts. That is what causes the itching, especially, I hear, after mis-use of the toilet brush. I'll leave you to your un-natural pleasures then! :-D

 

Unfortunately I inherited the family pile decades ago ;-) .......

 

Sadly mine wasn't a place in the country surrounded by acres *-) .......

 

But at least I made the best use of the family gumption :D ........

 

 

[Bulletguy]

pelmetman - 2020-11-21 6:04 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-11-21 5:37 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-11-20 9:54 AM........................................

1.......a) Can Europeans vote directly for their President?.......NO

b) Can their MEP's choose who their President is?.........NO.........All they can do is rubber stamp the decisions of the Fourth Reich >:-) .......

2.......Are not many the Southern EU economies now basketcase economies dependent on handouts from their Fourth Reich owners? ;-) .........

3.......Eh?........So what have you doing for your last umpteen posts? *-) ..........

4.......I prefer Democracy to hypocrisy which is why I voted to Leave B-) .........

5........Germaphobia based on FACT ;-) ........Who did Cameron go cap in hand too?.........Who has all the top jobs in the EU?.........Who is demanding EU countries sort out her Migration problem.......Germany & Merkel (lol) (lol) (lol) ...........

6.........Hopefully Poland & Hungary will help bring the Fourth Reich down >:-) ..........I did my bit by voting for BREXIT B-) .........

1 a) Correct, but so what? 1 b) Correct, but they can reject any candidate put forward by the commission - which then requires the submission of a different candidate. I think that is reasonable.

 

2 Not that I am aware of. Which countries have you in mind, and why and how are they in that position?

 

3 Arguing in favour of something is not the same as "defending" it. The EU is not perfect, and doubtless never will be. If I agree with criticisms I say so. But then, is the UK, or any state or confederation perfect? The point is that the imperfections can, over time, and with agreement, be remedied. Baby with bathwater argument, IMO.

 

4 The appointments are all, in varying ways, made, or confirmed, by either the MEPs or the elected Heads of State or government of the member states, all of whom are elected, in varying ways, by the citizens of the member states. What, actually, is wrong with that? A UK PM appoints the members of his cabinet. We don't elect his ministers, just the MPs from among whom he chooses. No-one elects members of the HoL. No-one elects government SPADS. No-one elects our head of state. There is hypocrisy in criticising democratic standards elsewhere, when unquestioningly accepting similar (or lower) democratic standards at home.

 

5 Prejudice speaking!! :-D Whether Cameron went "cap in hand" or merely approached the most influential head of state as the best place to start, is not a fact, it is a judgement. OTOH, who do you think he should have started with? One of the smallest, least influential, states presumably?

 

OK, since you're relying on facts, the top EU jobs are defined as:

1 The President of the European Council (collectively, the EU Heads of State) - (Nominated by the Council and elected by MEPs)

2 The President of the European Commission - the Civil Service (Appointed by the European Council)

3 The President of the European Central Bank (Appointed by the European Council)

4 The High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security - the EU Foreign Secretary (Appointed by the European Council)

5 The President of the European Parliament (Nominated by the Council and elected by MEPs)

 

Present holders are:

1 Charles Michel (Belgium)

2 Ursula von der Leyen (Germany)

3 Christene Lagarde (France)

4 Josep Borrell (Spain)

5 David Sassoli (Italy).

I don't see the German dominance. Whose "facts are you using, or did you just forget to check before sounding off? :-D

 

6 You do realise that Germany was a founder member of the European Coal and Steel Community ECSC) in 1951 (which in 1957 became the European Economic Cummunity (EEC), which in 1993 became the European Union) with just five initial members. Poland and Hungary (who both joined in 2004) don't have a cat in hell's chance of pulling down Germany, or the EU - all they could do is leave which, as they share borders with Russia (their old "friend"), and are economically dependent on the EU for their development, would be an act of self harm for them exceeding even that of Brexit for us (and they know it)! Dream on, Baby! :-D

 

Give it up Brian ;-) ........

 

You have lost :D ........

 

I'd rather bugger myself with my bog brush than reply to your Blah Blah Blah 8-) .......

 

At least it would stop my Farmer Giles from itching for a while :D ........

YOU are the one that LOST......long ago and should have conceded to save face, but you just kept on digging yourself into a deepening hole. (lol)(lol)

 

You got well and truly skewered (lol)(lol)