Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

An update on the Trump crime family – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,014
edited March 12 in General
An update on the Trump crime family – politicalbetting.com

"This is really a decision that will cause a lot of pain, not just because of the number, but because of the way in which the company is restricted going forward," says @AWeissmann_ on Judge Engoron's $355M ruling against Trump. pic.twitter.com/biLMoxyKjV

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Options
    Blogging will be light this weekend as I am on a romantic break.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    126 run lead.

    Surely that's going to be decisive unless India bat like they've all been smoking weed?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    Ukraine is slooooooowly losing the war


    "BREAKING: Ukrainian forces are withdrawing from Avdiivka, Donetsk oblast, Commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces say"

    https://x.com/Faytuks/status/1758646704423715166?s=20
  • Options
    ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,970
    Leon said:

    Ukraine is slooooooowly losing the war


    "BREAKING: Ukrainian forces are withdrawing from Avdiivka, Donetsk oblast, Commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces say"

    https://x.com/Faytuks/status/1758646704423715166?s=20

    If the Russian advance continues at this pace in another 50 years Ukraine could be in serious trouble.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994

    Leon said:

    Ukraine is slooooooowly losing the war


    "BREAKING: Ukrainian forces are withdrawing from Avdiivka, Donetsk oblast, Commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces say"

    https://x.com/Faytuks/status/1758646704423715166?s=20

    If the Russian advance continues at this pace in another 50 years Ukraine could be in serious trouble.
    Hence my slooooooooooowly

    It is attrition. Trouble is, on the most basic level, Russia can afford to be attrited more
  • Options
    swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,435
    whats the sense of the outcome of the Rochdale byelection - surely wide open and a chance for all manner of weird and whacky candidates (or is Labour quietly hoping their (now sacked) man comes through?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    FPT... @kjh is alright, some people are too partisan to appreciate him. Apart from that time he said he was going to buy a Panther Lima and I lost my shit. A line was crossed.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    Try this


    "From a soldier with Ukraine's 110th Brigade. He talks about problems with a lack of rotation, heavy attrition, shortage of soldiers, difficulty moving at night, chronic health issues + 40-45 average of age of soldiers, and few remaining fortifications."

    https://x.com/RALee85/status/1758708142601273412?s=20

    This TwiX source is often pro-Ukraine, and now he tweets this?

    If you read the text, it sounds like Ukrainian morale is collapsing on the front. Not good

    As we all know, wars of attrition keep attriting until suddenly they don't, and one side overwhelms the other. Allies v Germany in 1918

    At the moment, if you were sad enough to wager bets on the war, you'd wager that Russia would be doing the 'overwhelming'
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253

    Leon said:

    Ukraine is slooooooowly losing the war


    "BREAKING: Ukrainian forces are withdrawing from Avdiivka, Donetsk oblast, Commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces say"

    https://x.com/Faytuks/status/1758646704423715166?s=20

    If the Russian advance continues at this pace in another 50 years Ukraine could be in serious trouble.
    All these drones and guided missiles have taken that war back to a WW1 situation where the side that is moving is at a huge disadvantage.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    Leon said:

    Try this


    "From a soldier with Ukraine's 110th Brigade. He talks about problems with a lack of rotation, heavy attrition, shortage of soldiers, difficulty moving at night, chronic health issues + 40-45 average of age of soldiers, and few remaining fortifications."

    https://x.com/RALee85/status/1758708142601273412?s=20

    This TwiX source is often pro-Ukraine, and now he tweets this?

    If you read the text, it sounds like Ukrainian morale is collapsing on the front. Not good

    As we all know, wars of attrition keep attriting until suddenly they don't, and one side overwhelms the other. Allies v Germany in 1918

    At the moment, if you were sad enough to wager bets on the war, you'd wager that Russia would be doing the 'overwhelming'

    Stop trying destroy this site's morale. Shappsie has dropshipped them another few dozen DJIs off the jungle site. It'll all be over by Christmas.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Try this


    "From a soldier with Ukraine's 110th Brigade. He talks about problems with a lack of rotation, heavy attrition, shortage of soldiers, difficulty moving at night, chronic health issues + 40-45 average of age of soldiers, and few remaining fortifications."

    https://x.com/RALee85/status/1758708142601273412?s=20

    This TwiX source is often pro-Ukraine, and now he tweets this?

    If you read the text, it sounds like Ukrainian morale is collapsing on the front. Not good

    As we all know, wars of attrition keep attriting until suddenly they don't, and one side overwhelms the other. Allies v Germany in 1918

    At the moment, if you were sad enough to wager bets on the war, you'd wager that Russia would be doing the 'overwhelming'

    Stop trying destroy this site's morale. Shappsie has dropshipped them another few dozen DJIs off the jungle site. It'll all be over by Christmas.
    My grandfather was told by Montgomery that he would be home for Christmas.

    And he was.

    That was in 1942.

    The Christmas in question was 1945.
  • Options
    Can relate.


  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302

    Blogging will be light this weekend as I am on a romantic break.

    Enjoy.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859

    Can relate.


    Then they woke up this morning to an old-fashioned England batting collapse.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Deutsche Bank.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,615
    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    On topic, yes, it's a big number that will hurt him.

    Will it damage his campaign?

    I'm not so sure. I think independents know the score with him, and his base will just think it's all part of the conspiracy.

    It does make it that little bit more likely, though, that he seeks vengeance and recompense once in office.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,949
    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    It was Deutsche Bank - all the above was and is true.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Try this


    "From a soldier with Ukraine's 110th Brigade. He talks about problems with a lack of rotation, heavy attrition, shortage of soldiers, difficulty moving at night, chronic health issues + 40-45 average of age of soldiers, and few remaining fortifications."

    https://x.com/RALee85/status/1758708142601273412?s=20

    This TwiX source is often pro-Ukraine, and now he tweets this?

    If you read the text, it sounds like Ukrainian morale is collapsing on the front. Not good

    As we all know, wars of attrition keep attriting until suddenly they don't, and one side overwhelms the other. Allies v Germany in 1918

    At the moment, if you were sad enough to wager bets on the war, you'd wager that Russia would be doing the 'overwhelming'

    Stop trying destroy this site's morale. Shappsie has dropshipped them another few dozen DJIs off the jungle site. It'll all be over by Christmas.
    Sorry yes, I forgot about PB MORALE

    Apologies everyone. Zelensky shall march down Nevsky Prospekt in April!
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,615
    Dura_Ace said:

    FPT... @kjh is alright, some people are too partisan to appreciate him. Apart from that time he said he was going to buy a Panther Lima and I lost my shit. A line was crossed.

    Well thank you @Dura_Ace , although I am wondering if your support is aiding my cause or not.

    PS At no point was I going to buy a Panther Lima, it was a Panther J72. Does that mean you have been buying up and burning the wrong Panthers as you promised :smiley:
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    edited February 17

    On topic, yes, it's a big number that will hurt him.

    Will it damage his campaign?

    I'm not so sure. I think independents know the score with him, and his base will just think it's all part of the conspiracy.

    It does make it that little bit more likely, though, that he seeks vengeance and recompense once in office.

    However the polls, since SENILEGATE, have shifted - if anything - towards Biden, tho movement is small

    Perhaps none of this - Biden's senility, Trump's venality - makes any actual difference. The voters have decided, and they have decided it is going to be extremely close
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,149
    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    A lot of things in the financial system work on the assumption that the basic factual claims your counterparty makes are reasonably reliable, because if they try to defraud you they can be prosecuted and fined $370 million.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I'm not taking any break whatsoever, not least of all because it annoys you.

    a) You are a nasty and deeply personal poster. You know I've had issues with depression. You bringing up some of the examples of that at my worst moments are very low - even for you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    b) I can't remember anything you've posted of value. All I can recall is you creeping out of the woodwork occasionally to launch snide and personal attacks. That should tell you something.

    c) Don't you dare try and besmirch my reputation with esteemed posters, who I admire and respect; my point was you were trying to encourage a pile-on - you are a cyber-bully.

    d) Almost all of those "likes" are from the herd. Yes, there were one or two names that surprised me on that list and I will take it up with them.

    e) I also posted wishing OGH my good wishes - although I don't think it's appropriate to bring him into this, in any way - and also to give @AndyJS my best wishes following his robbery, and @BlancheLivermore - I applaud and encourage any pb'er - but I don't launch nasty personal assaults unless they are deserved.

    If you launch nasty and personal attacks at me expect that you can expect that back ten-fold, in ways that damage your morale and mental health in turn just as you damage mine.

    I'm not standing for it in silence. You deeply unpleasant man.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,311
    edited February 17
    Four bidders for London’s Elizabeth Line operator contract
    ...
    TRANSPORT for London (TfL) has confirmed a shortlist of four bidders to become the next operator of the Elizabeth Line from May 2025.

    The shortlisted bidders are:
    • Arriva UK Trains
    • First Keolis Elizabeth Line, a joint venture between FirstGroup and Keolis
    • GTS Rail Operations
    • MTR Corporation UK, the line’s existing operator
    https://www.railjournal.com/financial/four-bidders-for-londons-elizabeth-line-operator-contract/

    Which is your favourite? Or put another way, should that nice Mr Khan send the Elizabeth Line Line subsidy cheques to Germany, France, Japan or China respectively?
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,586
    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,615

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I'm not taking any break whatsoever, not least of all because it annoys you.

    a) You are a nasty and deeply personal poster. You know I've had issues with depression. You bringing up some of the examples of that at my worst moments are very low - even for you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    b) I can't remember anything you've posted of value. All I can recall is you creeping out of the woodwork occasionally to launch snide and personal attacks. That should tell you something.

    c) Don't you dare try and besmirch my reputation with esteemed posters, who I admire and respect; my point was you were trying to encourage a pile-on - you are a cyber-bully.

    d) Almost all of those "likes" are from the herd. Yes, there were one or two names that surprised me on that list and I will take it up with them.

    e) I also posted wishing OGH my good wishes - although I don't think it's appropriate to bring him into this, in any way - and also to give @AndyJS my best wishes following his robbery, and @BlancheLivermore - I applaud and encourage any pb'er - but I don't launch nasty personal assaults unless they are deserved.

    If you launch nasty and personal attacks at me expect that you can expect that back ten-fold, in ways that damage your morale and mental health in turn just as you damage mine.

    I'm not standing for it in silence. You deeply unpleasant man.
    You really, really really do need a break and need to seek some help.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    Leon said:

    On topic, yes, it's a big number that will hurt him.

    Will it damage his campaign?

    I'm not so sure. I think independents know the score with him, and his base will just think it's all part of the conspiracy.

    It does make it that little bit more likely, though, that he seeks vengeance and recompense once in office.

    However the polls, since SENILEGATE, have shifted - if anything - towards Biden, tho movement is small

    Perhaps none of this - Biden's senility, Trump's venality - makes any actual difference. The voters have decided, and they have decided it is going to be extremely close
    We'll see. There's a long way to go yet.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    kjh said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I'm not taking any break whatsoever, not least of all because it annoys you.

    a) You are a nasty and deeply personal poster. You know I've had issues with depression. You bringing up some of the examples of that at my worst moments are very low - even for you. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    b) I can't remember anything you've posted of value. All I can recall is you creeping out of the woodwork occasionally to launch snide and personal attacks. That should tell you something.

    c) Don't you dare try and besmirch my reputation with esteemed posters, who I admire and respect; my point was you were trying to encourage a pile-on - you are a cyber-bully.

    d) Almost all of those "likes" are from the herd. Yes, there were one or two names that surprised me on that list and I will take it up with them.

    e) I also posted wishing OGH my good wishes - although I don't think it's appropriate to bring him into this, in any way - and also to give @AndyJS my best wishes following his robbery, and @BlancheLivermore - I applaud and encourage any pb'er - but I don't launch nasty personal assaults unless they are deserved.

    If you launch nasty and personal attacks at me expect that you can expect that back ten-fold, in ways that damage your morale and mental health in turn just as you damage mine.

    I'm not standing for it in silence. You deeply unpleasant man.
    You really, really really do need a break and need to seek some help.
    No, I'm not going to be driven off the site by a total inadequate like you.

    The one who needs help is you: your clearly a deeply unpleasant individual, and that only just lurks beneath the surface, and it's something you're in denial about; you need to come to terms with it and seek treatment.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,870

    Four bidders for London’s Elizabeth Line operator contract
    ...
    TRANSPORT for London (TfL) has confirmed a shortlist of four bidders to become the next operator of the Elizabeth Line from May 2025.

    The shortlisted bidders are:

    • Arriva UK Trains
    • First Keolis Elizabeth Line, a joint venture between FirstGroup and Keolis
    • GTS Rail Operations
    • MTR Corporation UK, the line’s existing operator
    https://www.railjournal.com/financial/four-bidders-for-londons-elizabeth-line-operator-contract/

    Which is your favourite? Or put another way, should that nice Mr Khan send the Elizabeth Line Line subsidy cheques to Germany, France, Japan or China respectively?
    I think (he writes pedantically) that Arriva isn’t German any more, or won’t be for much longer. It’s in the process of being sold by Deutsche Bahn to a US-based infrastructure fund.

    It is still, of course, an absolute embarrassment of an operator, as anyone with the misfortune to travel on CrossCountry or the late unlamented Arriva Trains Wales can testify.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253
    edited February 17

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    IANAL but @DavidL is, and he is no friend of Trump (actively loathes him, I believe) and this is his verdict on the NY case from the prior thread

    "It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal."


    That summarises my feelings, the case reeks. There are better ways to squash Trump than really dodgy court cases which bring the whole NY legal system into disrepute. One of them is: beat him in an election. He's a terrible candidate. He's easily beatable, so beat him and see him gone
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    No, I am. And that's backed with money and my record.

    Find me the example of me being unobjective if you're so convinced they exist.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Deutsche Bank.
    Douche Bank.

    We were in Barcelona and my wife wondered why I started laughing. A guy had lost his card in a Douche Bank cash machine. It was the idea that anything to do with Douche might actually work…

    Did a few contracts there - investment bank side. Disorganised chaos. Due to a bizarre management structure, some people have multiple bosses they report to. Which means people will often not obey instructions from a boss if they don’t feel like it… never seen so much childish insubordination. Lots of private fiefdoms.

    I have name for all of them.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    kjh said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    FPT... @kjh is alright, some people are too partisan to appreciate him. Apart from that time he said he was going to buy a Panther Lima and I lost my shit. A line was crossed.

    Well thank you @Dura_Ace , although I am wondering if your support is aiding my cause or not.

    PS At no point was I going to buy a Panther Lima, it was a Panther J72. Does that mean you have been buying up and burning the wrong Panthers as you promised :smiley:
    There was a Lima involved at some point in that whole episode of insanity.

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    @kjh you can, of course, choose to give me an unreserved and unconditional apology, and promise not to launch personal attacks in future.

    Then, perhaps we can all talk in a more civilised manner going forwards - and you can show us all your ability to add objective, insightful posts from an orange-book perspective that add to the richness of the discussion on here.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    IANAL but @DavidL is, and he is no friend of Trump (actively loathes him, I believe) and this is his verdict on the NY case from the prior thread

    "It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal."


    That summarises my feelings, the case reeks. There are better ways to squash Trump than really dodgy court cases which bring the whole NY legal system into disrepute. One of them is: beat him in an election. He's a terrible candidate. He's easily beatable, so beat him and see him gone
    No it doesn't. Just look at what Trump has done, and did not dispute doing, as I outlined on the last thread, and you'll see what the issue was and why he's been fined.

    The criticism is that the crime was 'victimless' since everybody got their money. But it included tax evasion. Good luck arguing that is victimless if HMRC should ever pursue you for it.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    Trousers nailed to the masthead, crossed with boiling the frog

    He started off with a fairly small loan, kept rolling over. Bigger and biggger. No one cared in the boom times. Some idiots got a percentage as a commission, so it was all good. And in banking a big loan book is awesome. Quality be damned, I guess.

    By the time someone woke up (ha) it was a problem so big, that the only option was to declare it a genius strategy and continue rolling over.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I feel a need to intervene here. If you don't accept that @Casino_Royale is objective, I am going to find out where you live and come into your house at 3am and slap you in the face with a soft grey vinyl moccasin, repeatedly, until you develop mild bruising, and then I will catch a night bus to Newent where you won't be able to find me because I have lots of heavy Newent connections that you don't want to mess with
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    The thing is that $700m is a fair value for the Mar-a-Lago property, at least the right order of magnitude. Much smaller properties in the same area have sold for nine figures and the business is profitable. The judge saying it was worth almost nothing seemed totally unreasonable when looking at other properties around it.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    IANAL but @DavidL is, and he is no friend of Trump (actively loathes him, I believe) and this is his verdict on the NY case from the prior thread

    "It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal."


    That summarises my feelings, the case reeks. There are better ways to squash Trump than really dodgy court cases which bring the whole NY legal system into disrepute. One of them is: beat him in an election. He's a terrible candidate. He's easily beatable, so beat him and see him gone
    No it doesn't. Just look at what Trump has done, and did not dispute doing, as I outlined on the last thread, and you'll see what the issue was and why he's been fined.

    The criticism is that the crime was 'victimless' since everybody got their money. But it included tax evasion. Good luck arguing that is victimless if HMRC should ever pursue you for it.
    You're not a lawyer, you're a stupid teacher who doesn't even teach any more. Fie on you, Mr Chips
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I feel a need to intervene here. If you don't accept that @Casino_Royale is objective, I am going to find out where you live and come into your house at 3am and slap you in the face with a soft grey vinyl moccasin, repeatedly, until you develop mild bruising, and then I will catch a night bus to Newent where you won't be able to find me because I have lots of heavy Newent connections that you don't want to mess with
    Understood. What a privilege. Some people (mostly in the HoC) will pay good money for your moccasin services.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=lucy+in+the+sky#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:afda8995,vid:LgR6UNeQxXE,st:0
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I feel a need to intervene here. If you don't accept that @Casino_Royale is objective, I am going to find out where you live and come into your house at 3am and slap you in the face with a soft grey vinyl moccasin, repeatedly, until you develop mild bruising, and then I will catch a night bus to Newent where you won't be able to find me because I have lots of heavy Newent connections that you don't want to mess with
    A Brilliant plan, with one fatal flaw.

    There are no longer night buses to Newent.
    So what? I can still hire a seven year old MINIBUS, and do the journey in under 70 minutes

    Hahahahaha
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I am objective, it's a fact.

    I think some people's definition of being "unobjective" is simply having anything good to say at any time about the current PM or administration, or the underlying party itself. They simply see that anyone sane must agree that the whole lot is fundamentally damned and awful, and if not, you are deluded.

    Do you see any irony in that, per chance?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    The thing is that $700m is a fair value for the Mar-a-Lago property, at least the right order of magnitude. Much smaller properties in the same area have sold for nine figures and the business is profitable. The judge saying it was worth almost nothing seemed totally unreasonable when looking at other properties around it.
    This is wrong, and I'm getting sick of trying to explain it.

    The judge didn't say that. He said it had been valued at four times the next most expensive property.

    And even if you are right, there remain two serious problems:

    1) Falsely claiming it was a social club to benefit from a tax exemption;

    2) Valuing it at $18 million for tax purposes.

    It is not just about fraudulent valuations. It's about using different valuations for different purposes to obtain a financial advantage.

    Which is a crime.

    Which is why he's had such a colossal fine imposed..
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I am objective, it's a fact.

    I think some people's definition of being "unobjective" is simply having anything good to say at any time about the current PM or administration, or the underlying party itself. They simply see that anyone sane must agree that the whole lot is fundamentally damned and awful, and if not, you are deluded.

    Do you see any irony in that, per chance?
    What’s your objective take on VAT on school fees?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    I don’t think it is a left or right thing. Everyone is the hero of their own tale, after all. Huge numbers of people instinctively believe they have set the world to rights. In their heads.

    I rather think that it’s the number of people who say of a problem - “I’m not sure. What does the data say?” - which is the tiny, tiny number.

    The other day, someone suggested making policy based on evidenced. And was roundly condemned by a few here. As soulless, without a compass etc…

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    IANAL but @DavidL is, and he is no friend of Trump (actively loathes him, I believe) and this is his verdict on the NY case from the prior thread

    "It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal."


    That summarises my feelings, the case reeks. There are better ways to squash Trump than really dodgy court cases which bring the whole NY legal system into disrepute. One of them is: beat him in an election. He's a terrible candidate. He's easily beatable, so beat him and see him gone
    No it doesn't. Just look at what Trump has done, and did not dispute doing, as I outlined on the last thread, and you'll see what the issue was and why he's been fined.

    The criticism is that the crime was 'victimless' since everybody got their money. But it included tax evasion. Good luck arguing that is victimless if HMRC should ever pursue you for it.
    You're not a lawyer, you're a stupid teacher who doesn't even teach any more. Fie on you, Mr Chips
    I don't teach? I'm getting all this money for doing nothing? That's rather nice.

    As for the rest - Says a flint dildo knapper who no longer knaps flint dildos but writes bad travel articles for a seedy magazine...
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    Anyway, my kids are up and I'm taking them out for the day. Enjoy all.

    I await the apology of @kjh when I log-on later with interest.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,615
    Dura_Ace said:

    kjh said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    FPT... @kjh is alright, some people are too partisan to appreciate him. Apart from that time he said he was going to buy a Panther Lima and I lost my shit. A line was crossed.

    Well thank you @Dura_Ace , although I am wondering if your support is aiding my cause or not.

    PS At no point was I going to buy a Panther Lima, it was a Panther J72. Does that mean you have been buying up and burning the wrong Panthers as you promised :smiley:
    There was a Lima involved at some point in that whole episode of insanity.

    My word so there was. How on earth did you find that post so quickly? I never really considered the Lima though as soon as I saw the Kallista and then I moved onto the J72. I'm really a tyre kicker though.

    Sorry to have confused you with the constant name changes in your desire to destroy them all to prevent me from buying one.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    Nohit is out - but too late...

    Also, not just Bairstow, Root's had a pretty poor series with the bat.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Anyway, my kids are up and I'm taking them out for the day. Enjoy all.

    I await the apology of @kjh when I log-on later with interest.

    Have a lovely day.
  • Options
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    IANAL but @DavidL is, and he is no friend of Trump (actively loathes him, I believe) and this is his verdict on the NY case from the prior thread

    "It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal."


    That summarises my feelings, the case reeks. There are better ways to squash Trump than really dodgy court cases which bring the whole NY legal system into disrepute. One of them is: beat him in an election. He's a terrible candidate. He's easily beatable, so beat him and see him gone
    No it doesn't. Just look at what Trump has done, and did not dispute doing, as I outlined on the last thread, and you'll see what the issue was and why he's been fined.

    The criticism is that the crime was 'victimless' since everybody got their money. But it included tax evasion. Good luck arguing that is victimless if HMRC should ever pursue you for it.
    You're not a lawyer, you're a stupid teacher who doesn't even teach any more. Fie on you, Mr Chips
    He's still run rings around you intellectually, though, hasn't he?

    Not a tremendously high bar, but still.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,635
    Logs on, finds there are more squabbles than a kindergarten after the wrong kind of synthetic fizzy drink, and logs off again in the search for porridge.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    The thing is that $700m is a fair value for the Mar-a-Lago property, at least the right order of magnitude. Much smaller properties in the same area have sold for nine figures and the business is profitable. The judge saying it was worth almost nothing seemed totally unreasonable when looking at other properties around it.
    This is wrong, and I'm getting sick of trying to explain it.

    The judge didn't say that. He said it had been valued at four times the next most expensive property.

    And even if you are right, there remain two serious problems:

    1) Falsely claiming it was a social club to benefit from a tax exemption;

    2) Valuing it at $18 million for tax purposes.

    It is not just about fraudulent valuations. It's about using different valuations for different purposes to obtain a financial advantage.

    Which is a crime.

    Which is why he's had such a colossal fine imposed..
    And valuing the same thing as massively valuable and relatively worthless at the same time is exactly the kind of thing a Trump level “genius” would think is smart business.

    The thinking of a third rate car dealership owner.
  • Options
    Foreign dentists to be allowed to work in UK without qualification checks
    Ministers plan to scrap exam required to allow dentists from countries outside of Europe to work here, in a bid to solve dentistry crisis

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/16/foreign-dentists-allowed-work-uk-without-qualifications/ (£££)

    What could possibly go wrong? (Besides the incoming dentists also not taking on NHS patients.)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    edited February 17
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I am objective, it's a fact.

    I think some people's definition of being "unobjective" is simply having anything good to say at any time about the current PM or administration, or the underlying party itself. They simply see that anyone sane must agree that the whole lot is fundamentally damned and awful, and if not, you are deluded.

    Do you see any irony in that, per chance?
    What’s your objective take on VAT on school fees?
    Quickly, that they will lead to redundancies at smaller schools and closure of a few and raise very little money, if anything at all, for the exchequer - and that the capital costs of expansion of state schools to compensate haven't been taken into account.

    Want another objective view? I've said on here for a long time that the state education sector is underfunded and I would cut back on funding of pensions to pay for it.

    How do you think such views go down with the Tory base atm?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    OK I think the site needs a change of subject


    I have just discovered the most amazing perceptual illusion. I can't believe I haven't seen it before, perhaps I have but forgot about it in my dotage. Perhaps we all discussed it last week. Anyway here it is

    Watch this video, but before you watch it, read the line

    GREEN NEEDLE

    Then watch it again, but this time read the words

    BRAIN STORM

    https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/1749901393828495824?s=20

    WTAF is going on? The guy who made this is adamant it is exactly the same sound. And he is queried below by skeptics, but seems to persuade them. A genuine illusion?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    ydoethur said:

    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    The thing is that $700m is a fair value for the Mar-a-Lago property, at least the right order of magnitude. Much smaller properties in the same area have sold for nine figures and the business is profitable. The judge saying it was worth almost nothing seemed totally unreasonable when looking at other properties around it.
    This is wrong, and I'm getting sick of trying to explain it.

    The judge didn't say that. He said it had been valued at four times the next most expensive property.

    And even if you are right, there remain two serious problems:

    1) Falsely claiming it was a social club to benefit from a tax exemption;

    2) Valuing it at $18 million for tax purposes.

    It is not just about fraudulent valuations. It's about using different valuations for different purposes to obtain a financial advantage.

    Which is a crime.

    Which is why he's had such a colossal fine imposed..
    Er, it is a social club, is it not?

    It’s also at least four times the size of the next property, look at a map and you can see it’s huge.
    https://maps.app.goo.gl/gnUujVuRtjHqYJnZA?g_st=ic

    I don’t know where the $18m came from, but if it were a crime he’d have been prosecuted though, rather than a civil case.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I feel a need to intervene here. If you don't accept that @Casino_Royale is objective, I am going to find out where you live and come into your house at 3am and slap you in the face with a soft grey vinyl moccasin, repeatedly, until you develop mild bruising, and then I will catch a night bus to Newent where you won't be able to find me because I have lots of heavy Newent connections that you don't want to mess with
    Understood. What a privilege. Some people (mostly in the HoC) will pay good money for your moccasin services.
    Not HoL?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    It is a bit suss how DJT suddenly gets hit with a blizzard of cases from 2020 onward.

    The most likely situation is that a) DJT has done loads of heinous prosecutable shit AND b) some of the cases are politically motivated.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Dutch press are reporting that Christian Horner could be for the chop at Red Bull. Another one who can’t keep his pants on.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/formulaone/article-13092275/Christian-Horner-sexual-misconduct-female-Red-Bull-reveals-sexual-messages-Geri-Halliwell-hush-money.html
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    Jonathan said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    Perhaps we can all agree that Casino self identifies as “objective” and respect his choice. It’s obviously really important to him, even if we can’t quite always see it yet.
    I am objective, it's a fact.

    I think some people's definition of being "unobjective" is simply having anything good to say at any time about the current PM or administration, or the underlying party itself. They simply see that anyone sane must agree that the whole lot is fundamentally damned and awful, and if not, you are deluded.

    Do you see any irony in that, per chance?
    What’s your objective take on VAT on school fees?
    Quickly, that they will lead to redundancies at smaller schools and closure of a few and raise very little money, if anything at all, for the exchequer - and that the capital costs of expansion of state schools to compensate haven't been taken into account.

    What another objective view? I've said on here for a long time that the state education sector is underfunded and I would cut back on funding of pensions to pay for it.

    How do you think such views go down with the Tory base atm?
    A decent attempt today, but you might reflect that you do have bias here and have expressed it more than directly on a few occasions.

    It’s an important, visceral issue for you. And I respect that all the more.
  • Options
    kjhkjh Posts: 10,615

    @kjh you can, of course, choose to give me an unreserved and unconditional apology, and promise not to launch personal attacks in future.

    Then, perhaps we can all talk in a more civilised manner going forwards - and you can show us all your ability to add objective, insightful posts from an orange-book perspective that add to the richness of the discussion on here.

    You do realise I have not made a personal attack on you don't you? Not at all. You have created and done all of this to yourself. You accused me of being a leftwinger. All I did was point out this was wrong and listed out people with whom I share views or suggested you contact someone like @hyufd who is well aware of my views and who could put you right. The rest is in your imagination.

    You have imagined all of this and are getting very very very angry. So please get help for your own well being.

    I am not going to respond anymore because it isn't doing you any good.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    IANAL but @DavidL is, and he is no friend of Trump (actively loathes him, I believe) and this is his verdict on the NY case from the prior thread

    "It’s possible that NY State were conned out of some taxes in which case they should sue. The current proceedings do seem to me to be partisan, politically motivated and ill judged. I can’t see this nonsense surviving appeal."


    That summarises my feelings, the case reeks. There are better ways to squash Trump than really dodgy court cases which bring the whole NY legal system into disrepute. One of them is: beat him in an election. He's a terrible candidate. He's easily beatable, so beat him and see him gone
    No it doesn't. Just look at what Trump has done, and did not dispute doing, as I outlined on the last thread, and you'll see what the issue was and why he's been fined.

    The criticism is that the crime was 'victimless' since everybody got their money. But it included tax evasion. Good luck arguing that is victimless if HMRC should ever pursue you for it.
    You're not a lawyer, you're a stupid teacher who doesn't even teach any more. Fie on you, Mr Chips
    He's still run rings around you intellectually, though, hasn't he?

    Not a tremendously high bar, but still.
    Er, it's not a debate I've been conducting with great seriousness, hence my threat to go round to Jonathan's house and "slap him repeatedly with a soft grey vinyl moccasin, causing mild contusion, before fleeing on a night bus to Newent" - I kinda thought that was a clue - but if you want to be a dull humourless fuckwit who thinks it proves anything, do go ahead and knock yourself out
  • Options
    Leon said:

    OK I think the site needs a change of subject


    I have just discovered the most amazing perceptual illusion. I can't believe I haven't seen it before, perhaps I have but forgot about it in my dotage. Perhaps we all discussed it last week. Anyway here it is

    Watch this video, but before you watch it, read the line

    GREEN NEEDLE

    Then watch it again, but this time read the words

    BRAIN STORM

    https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/1749901393828495824?s=20

    WTAF is going on? The guy who made this is adamant it is exactly the same sound. And he is queried below by skeptics, but seems to persuade them. A genuine illusion?

    Very interesting, still works if you mix up the words so BRAIN NEEDLE and GREEN STORM can be heard, well at least by me anyway.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994

    Leon said:

    OK I think the site needs a change of subject


    I have just discovered the most amazing perceptual illusion. I can't believe I haven't seen it before, perhaps I have but forgot about it in my dotage. Perhaps we all discussed it last week. Anyway here it is

    Watch this video, but before you watch it, read the line

    GREEN NEEDLE

    Then watch it again, but this time read the words

    BRAIN STORM

    https://x.com/BrianRoemmele/status/1749901393828495824?s=20

    WTAF is going on? The guy who made this is adamant it is exactly the same sound. And he is queried below by skeptics, but seems to persuade them. A genuine illusion?

    Very interesting, still works if you mix up the words so BRAIN NEEDLE and GREEN STORM can be heard, well at least by me anyway.
    It is absolutely fascinating, isn't it?

    There are multiple different scientific explanations below, and no consensus as to what is going on
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,207
    edited February 17
    Last night I walked past the Russian Embassy, a few doors down from where I live in Tallinn. A silent crowd had gathered, holding candles. The mourning of Andrei Navalny was profoundly sad and moving.

    The murder of Navalny has shaken people, both Estonian and Russian, in a way I have not seen since Putin´s speech on the eve of the invasion of Ukraine, which made it clear that the invasion was inevitable.

    The point is that even the USSR kept dissidents like Solzhenitsyn and Sakharov alive, even when they imprisoned them. It was an acceptance that the West would do something if such people were to be murdered.

    Putin murders his opponents with impunity because he believes that it does not matter what the West says or does. The fact is that the West has lost all ability to deter Putin. We could not deter the invasion, we could not deter him from outright murder.

    The collapse of deterrence means that we will not be able to deter the coming attack directly against NATO targets, whether that attack is another against the undersea cables and pipelines in the Baltic or the North Sea, or a direct military incursion against Finland, Estonia or any other NATO state.

    The weakness of the Americans response and the unhinged comments from Trump have given Putin hope that the West is decadent and that he can seize unlimited territory without the West offering meaningful resistance.

    The failure to bolster Ukraine until it could be too late guarantees the expansion of the war. Estonia, Denmark, Poland, even Germany and the UK are not the only voices that now expect that Russia will expand the war with a direct attack on NATO member states within a maximum of 3-5 years.

    So what does the murder of Navalny mean?

    A Russian speaking friend of mine who had stood in the crowd said it very clearly; It means war. It means Russia will not be deterred from attacking the West.

    I think the West will win, but having seen Coventry for the first time a couple of months ago, I think what cost with the war involve? It would be a shame to lose Paris or London, Rome or Istanbul as Coventry was lost.

    It is inevitable that Putin will ultimately use nuclear weapons, and though we may have some defence, it will not be complete. Moscow will burn, but millions elsewhere will be also be dead.

    Future generations will ask, as they ask of the 1930s, "could we not have stopped this sooner?"
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983
    edited February 17
    Sandpit said:


    The behaviour of his lawyers doesn’t help him though, with a bombastic and aloof attitude to the court that no judge likes.

    This is something I really don't understand. Trump isn't even paying his own legal bills but he still seems to employ the worst fucking lawyers in the US. Why doesn't he get somebody good?
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253
    edited February 17

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    No, I am. And that's backed with money and my record.

    Find me the example of me being unobjective if you're so convinced they exist.
    I don't think that's an argument worth having, with someone who struggles with the premise?

    Objectivity rests on evidence and provable facts and is usually heavy on qualifications and uncertainty, since objectively there are relatively few things that can be known for certain. Particularly in politics.

    Subjectivity rests upon assertion and opinion and prejudice, in the literal sense of having pre judged the outcome in the absence of firm facts. All of us are subjective to a greater or lesser extent; it's human nature. None of us is Spock.

    One form of subjectivity is attaching yourself to a particular political party and arguing their corner regardless of the facts - HY would have been a good example in times past, although events are driving even him toward being more questioning of late. That's the form of subjectiviy that you seem to be railing against.

    But there are other ways to be subjective, and when it comes to argument based on solely on evidence rather than personal opinion, bias or prejudice, I'd say you're well in the pack, as am I, and certainly not way out in front as you seem to think.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,132
    What's the betting that the Americans still end up voting Trump into office regardless? His chances are clearly excellent. A product more of extreme idiocy combined with the division of the country into two mutually loathing camps than of the evident senility of Biden. What a bloody mess.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    Dura_Ace said:

    It is a bit suss how DJT suddenly gets hit with a blizzard of cases from 2020 onward.

    The most likely situation is that a) DJT has done loads of heinous prosecutable shit AND b) some of the cases are politically motivated.

    Digging through the past and present of your opponent is standard in politics.

    Consider the enthusiasm for Starmers judgements as DPP. Or the enthusiasm to try and link various scandals to the politicians in power - PPE, Grenfell, Post Office etc.

    What is unusual, is finding so much crime at the end of the search.

    Trump is the classic 70s/80s style property “Billionaire” - an empire of debt built by making dodgy deals all the way. Then you have his side hobby of sexual… misbehaviour, complete with payoffs.

    Then he went for semi-demi-fascist politics. Complete with the worst remake of The March On Rome, ever.

    And he seems to have been especially stupid in creating an obvious trail of his behaviour.
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,149
    edited February 17
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    I think with Trump, building on my reply to Leon about what he did on the previous thread, the question is not whether what he did was illegal, but why on Earth the banks didn't rumble him? Re-evaluating properties at three times their size and four times their worth should have set alarm bells clanging.

    Some possible theories;

    1) They knew, but didn't care because they didn't think it mattered;

    2) They knew, but didn't care because they wanted the business anyway;

    3) They knew, but didn't care because they were all bezzy mates with Trump;

    4) They didn't know, because they were stupid.

    None of them exactly inspire confidence in the banks he was working with...

    Maybe they just didn’t have the bigger picture. When the evidence is all laid out, the fraud is obvious, but one valuation at a time, to different banks, maybe no-one could put the picture together.
    If it had been a few million dollars e.g. 25 against 18, I would agree. And the judge himself noted that you do get different valuations so if it had been small variations the case would never have come to court.

    But not $700 million. That was so far out it should have been an immediate red flag.
    The thing is that $700m is a fair value for the Mar-a-Lago property, at least the right order of magnitude. Much smaller properties in the same area have sold for nine figures and the business is profitable. The judge saying it was worth almost nothing seemed totally unreasonable when looking at other properties around it.
    Did you read the ruling? (Or just skip to the relevant parts, it's pretty long.) American judges are such great writers, the original judgement is nearly always better written than the reporting.
    https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/egpbajldovq/Trump-order-20240216.pdf

    What Trump did with Mar-a-lago was to sign away the right for it to be used as anything except a social club, so that he could pay lower property taxes on it. After that when they tried to tax him on the basis that it was worth $25 million, he filed an appeal on the grounds that $25 million was too high (although he later withdrew it). Then he reported it to the bank as if he hadn't done that, which resulted in a vastly higher valuation.

    This is one of the harder thing for us to interpret because the stuff about what you can use it for is a bit obscure, but a lot of the other cases where he's pulling the same moves in ways that are much more blatant, for example lying about how big a penthouse was or how many floors a building had.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 46,994
    Cicero said:

    Last night I walked past the Russian Embassy, a few doors down from where I live in Tallinn. A silent crowd had gathered, holding candles. The mourning of Andrei Navalny was profoundly sad and moving.

    The murder of Navalny has shaken people, both Estonian and Russian, in a way I have not seen since Putin´s speech on the eve of the invasion of Ukraine, which made it clear that the invasion was inevitable.

    The point is that even the USSR kept dissidents like Solzhenitsyn and Sakharov alive, even when they imprisoned them. It was an acceptance that the West would do something if such people were to be murdered.

    Putin murders his opponents with impunity because he believes that it does not matter what the West says or does. The fact is that the West has lost all ability to deter Putin. We could not deter the invasion, we could not deter him from outright murder.

    The collapse of deterrence means that we will not be able to deter the coming attack directly against NATO targets, whether that attack is another against the undersea cables and pipelines in the Baltic or the North Sea, or a direct military incursion against Finland, Estonia or any other NATO state.

    The weakness of the Americans response and the unhinged comments from Trump have given Putin hope that the West is decadent and that he can seize unlimited territory without the West offering meaningful resistance.

    The failure to bolster Ukraine until it could be too late guarantees the expansion of the war. Estonia, Denmark, Poland, even Germany and the UK are not the only voices that now expect that Russia will expand the war with a direct attack on NATO member states within a maximum of 3-5 years.

    So what does the murder of Navalny mean?

    A Russian speaking friend of mine who had stood in the crowd said it very clearly; It means war. It means Russia will not be deterred from attacking the West.

    I think the West will win, but having seen Coventry for the first time a couple of months ago, I think what cost with the war involve? It would be a shame to lose Paris or London, Rome or Istanbul as Coventry was lost.

    It is inevitable that Putin will ultimately use nuclear weapons, and though we may have some defence, it will not be complete. Moscow will burn, but millions elsewhere will be also be dead.

    Future generations will ask, as they ask of the 1930s, "could we not have stopped this sooner?"

    Well who's Mister Gloomypants today?

    Look on the bright side, they might level Coventry AGAIN, then we can start over
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,960
    Carnyx said:

    Logs on, finds there are more squabbles than a kindergarten after the wrong kind of synthetic fizzy drink, and logs off again in the search for porridge.

    Agree, apart from the porridge. As a Guardian reader it was, of course muesli!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    kjh said:

    @kjh you can, of course, choose to give me an unreserved and unconditional apology, and promise not to launch personal attacks in future.

    Then, perhaps we can all talk in a more civilised manner going forwards - and you can show us all your ability to add objective, insightful posts from an orange-book perspective that add to the richness of the discussion on here.

    You do realise I have not made a personal attack on you don't you? Not at all. You have created and done all of this to yourself. You accused me of being a leftwinger. All I did was point out this was wrong and listed out people with whom I share views or suggested you contact someone like @hyufd who is well aware of my views and who could put you right. The rest is in your imagination.

    You have imagined all of this and are getting very very very angry. So please get help for your own well being.

    I am not going to respond anymore because it isn't doing you any good.
    How disappointing that you don't have the good grace to apologise for your personal attacks, and for bringing my mental health into it. The attempts at gaslighting also reflect poorly on you.

    You are a weak man of weak character. Others on here will note your lack of integrity with interest and judge you accordingly.

    As for you and myself I suggest we never engage with each other on this site again.

    Good day.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,845
    Leon said:

    Ukraine is slooooooowly losing the war


    "BREAKING: Ukrainian forces are withdrawing from Avdiivka, Donetsk oblast, Commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces say"

    https://x.com/Faytuks/status/1758646704423715166?s=20

    Thanks to trump and his buddies
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    The behaviour of his lawyers doesn’t help him though, with a bombastic and aloof attitude to the court that no judge likes.

    This is something I really don't understand. Trump isn't even paying his own legal bills but he still seems to employ the worst fucking lawyers in the US. Why doesn't he get somebody good?
    I can only suspect that the lawyers are behaving exactly as instructed by their client. He can afford a superstar legal team, put prefers to pick people who will go to the court with a bad attitude. No idea why.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,302
    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    IanB2 said:

    kjh said:

    FPT @Casino_Royale

    I really think you need another break from the site for a few days. It really isn't doing you any good is it? You are now just talking drivel. Let's do a little breakdown:

    a) Accusation of being immature. This coming from someone who has twice challenged PBs to fist fights

    b) You can't remember anything I have posted and then wrote reams on what I posted in the past

    c) You say I tagged all 'my mates', the people you accuse of being Labour supporters namely: @hyufd, @BartholomewRoberts, @DavidL, @Richard_Tyndall, @Sean_F, @Selebian, @Nigelb (I've done it again). I'm sure they will all appreciate being called socialists.

    d) 10 likes to my post and only 1 from that list and the likes included yet another well known lefty @Big_G_NorthWales. Do you think maybe you have got me wrong in calling me a Labour supporter and that maybe people do think you are partisan. Just maybe? Just a little bit?

    e) You accuse me of making personal posts (even though you can't remember any of my posts) and I agree I do. Yesterday I made a post wishing OGH my good wishes and also a post on some polite children I met when walking at a NT site and before that wishing @MarqueeMark good luck in his presentation. So yes I do post really personal stuff.

    You need a break Casino. You really do. This site is getting to you.

    I think Casino has fallen into a common habit of many right wing folk in thinking that their views aren't 'partisan' or 'political', but merely objective common sense. Whereas of course one person's common sense is another person's prejudice.

    It's the flip side of the left wing habit of thinking that only their own politics has any intrinsic virtue.
    Err, no. I happen to be known as a regular "Conservative" poster on here who can be quite forthright in challenging others thinking.

    That's enough for many people. If you have a happy echo chamber of groupthink and someone upsets the applecart it's very easy to confuse that with being "partisan". It's simple social dynamics, and it can happen in things like, for example, WhatsApp too. And Twitter is much worse. My posts are filled with views that are at odds with traditional Conservative thinking, and new ways of thinking, but people pretend not to notice and just prefer simple labels.

    Just as you prefer to flag any post that you disagree with.
    You must surely see the flaw in your statement "I'm one of the most objective people on here"?
    No, I am. And that's backed with money and my record.

    Find me the example of me being unobjective if you're so convinced they exist.
    I don't think that's an argument worth having, with someone who struggles with the premise?

    Objectivity rests on evidence and provable facts and is usually heavy on qualifications and uncertainty, since objectively there are relatively few things that can be known for certain. Particularly in politics.

    Subjectivity rests upon assertion and opinion and prejudice, in the literal sense of having pre judged the outcome in the absence of firm facts. All of us are subjective to a greater or lesser extent; it's human nature. None of us is Spock.

    One form of subjectivity is attaching yourself to a particular political party and arguing their corner regardless of the facts - HY would have been a good example in times past, although events are driving even him toward being more questioning of late. That's the form of subjectiviy that you seem to be railing against.

    But there are other ways to be subjective, and when it comes to argument based on solely on evidence rather than personal opinion, bias or prejudice, I'd say you're well in the pack, as am I, and certainly not way out in front as you seem to think.
    So, you don't have any examples then. Got it.

    Good day, Ian. I hope you enjoy walking your dog.
  • Options
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    The behaviour of his lawyers doesn’t help him though, with a bombastic and aloof attitude to the court that no judge likes.

    This is something I really don't understand. Trump isn't even paying his own legal bills but he still seems to employ the worst fucking lawyers in the US. Why doesn't he get somebody good?
    Hasn't he Art Of The Deal'd enough lawyers in the past that nobody good is prepared to work for him?
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,141
    Alexei Navalny
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,149
    malcolmg said:

    Leon said:

    Ukraine is slooooooowly losing the war


    "BREAKING: Ukrainian forces are withdrawing from Avdiivka, Donetsk oblast, Commander in chief of Ukraine's armed forces say"

    https://x.com/Faytuks/status/1758646704423715166?s=20

    Thanks to trump and his buddies
    Partly thanks to that, but also thanks to other democracies that Ukraine relies on caring much less about who wins than Russia does.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    The behaviour of his lawyers doesn’t help him though, with a bombastic and aloof attitude to the court that no judge likes.

    This is something I really don't understand. Trump isn't even paying his own legal bills but he still seems to employ the worst fucking lawyers in the US. Why doesn't he get somebody good?
    I think you answered your own question - Trump has run through the vaguely good lawyers.

    A combination of not paying, aggression against his lawyers for not winning unwinnable cases and that good lawyers have some kind of respect for rules of conduct.

    The ones prepared to take him on now are the bottom of the barrel.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    The behaviour of his lawyers doesn’t help him though, with a bombastic and aloof attitude to the court that no judge likes.

    This is something I really don't understand. Trump isn't even paying his own legal bills but he still seems to employ the worst fucking lawyers in the US. Why doesn't he get somebody good?
    Partly because those bills often don't get paid at all
  • Options
    maxhmaxh Posts: 825
    Carnyx said:

    Logs on, finds there are more squabbles than a kindergarten after the wrong kind of synthetic fizzy drink, and logs off again in the search for porridge.

    I see what you mean.

    I think it's worth everyone remembering that there are humans behind these avatars. Some of whom emerge from the pile-on a bit sticky from the Tizer that has been thrown at them, but otherwise energised and ready to spend the day knapping flints or suchlike. Others, though, having just fished out the midget gems that have been forcibly stuffed in their every orifice during the coordinated final assault on the messy mat, then take the stress and rancour out on real-life innocents such as recently awoken young kids.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 32,875
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:


    The behaviour of his lawyers doesn’t help him though, with a bombastic and aloof attitude to the court that no judge likes.

    This is something I really don't understand. Trump isn't even paying his own legal bills but he still seems to employ the worst fucking lawyers in the US. Why doesn't he get somebody good?
    Presumably a good lawyer would look at his case and say "you haven't got a chance"
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,772
    On Newsnight last night one of the guests suggested it wasn’t in Putin’s interests to kill Navalny as this would embolden the pro Ukraine camp especially in the USA where there is more pressure on the House to pass aid proposals .

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,319
    Leon said:

    Cicero said:

    Last night I walked past the Russian Embassy, a few doors down from where I live in Tallinn. A silent crowd had gathered, holding candles. The mourning of Andrei Navalny was profoundly sad and moving.

    The murder of Navalny has shaken people, both Estonian and Russian, in a way I have not seen since Putin´s speech on the eve of the invasion of Ukraine, which made it clear that the invasion was inevitable.

    The point is that even the USSR kept dissidents like Solzhenitsyn and Sakharov alive, even when they imprisoned them. It was an acceptance that the West would do something if such people were to be murdered.

    Putin murders his opponents with impunity because he believes that it does not matter what the West says or does. The fact is that the West has lost all ability to deter Putin. We could not deter the invasion, we could not deter him from outright murder.

    The collapse of deterrence means that we will not be able to deter the coming attack directly against NATO targets, whether that attack is another against the undersea cables and pipelines in the Baltic or the North Sea, or a direct military incursion against Finland, Estonia or any other NATO state.

    The weakness of the Americans response and the unhinged comments from Trump have given Putin hope that the West is decadent and that he can seize unlimited territory without the West offering meaningful resistance.

    The failure to bolster Ukraine until it could be too late guarantees the expansion of the war. Estonia, Denmark, Poland, even Germany and the UK are not the only voices that now expect that Russia will expand the war with a direct attack on NATO member states within a maximum of 3-5 years.

    So what does the murder of Navalny mean?

    A Russian speaking friend of mine who had stood in the crowd said it very clearly; It means war. It means Russia will not be deterred from attacking the West.

    I think the West will win, but having seen Coventry for the first time a couple of months ago, I think what cost with the war involve? It would be a shame to lose Paris or London, Rome or Istanbul as Coventry was lost.

    It is inevitable that Putin will ultimately use nuclear weapons, and though we may have some defence, it will not be complete. Moscow will burn, but millions elsewhere will be also be dead.

    Future generations will ask, as they ask of the 1930s, "could we not have stopped this sooner?"

    Well who's Mister Gloomypants today?

    Look on the bright side, they might level Coventry AGAIN, then we can start over
    If they nuke Slough & Bedford, does that mean that Putin will be liable for the enormous capital gains on property there?
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,141

    Leon said:

    Cicero said:

    Last night I walked past the Russian Embassy, a few doors down from where I live in Tallinn. A silent crowd had gathered, holding candles. The mourning of Andrei Navalny was profoundly sad and moving.

    The murder of Navalny has shaken people, both Estonian and Russian, in a way I have not seen since Putin´s speech on the eve of the invasion of Ukraine, which made it clear that the invasion was inevitable.

    The point is that even the USSR kept dissidents like Solzhenitsyn and Sakharov alive, even when they imprisoned them. It was an acceptance that the West would do something if such people were to be murdered.

    Putin murders his opponents with impunity because he believes that it does not matter what the West says or does. The fact is that the West has lost all ability to deter Putin. We could not deter the invasion, we could not deter him from outright murder.

    The collapse of deterrence means that we will not be able to deter the coming attack directly against NATO targets, whether that attack is another against the undersea cables and pipelines in the Baltic or the North Sea, or a direct military incursion against Finland, Estonia or any other NATO state.

    The weakness of the Americans response and the unhinged comments from Trump have given Putin hope that the West is decadent and that he can seize unlimited territory without the West offering meaningful resistance.

    The failure to bolster Ukraine until it could be too late guarantees the expansion of the war. Estonia, Denmark, Poland, even Germany and the UK are not the only voices that now expect that Russia will expand the war with a direct attack on NATO member states within a maximum of 3-5 years.

    So what does the murder of Navalny mean?

    A Russian speaking friend of mine who had stood in the crowd said it very clearly; It means war. It means Russia will not be deterred from attacking the West.

    I think the West will win, but having seen Coventry for the first time a couple of months ago, I think what cost with the war involve? It would be a shame to lose Paris or London, Rome or Istanbul as Coventry was lost.

    It is inevitable that Putin will ultimately use nuclear weapons, and though we may have some defence, it will not be complete. Moscow will burn, but millions elsewhere will be also be dead.

    Future generations will ask, as they ask of the 1930s, "could we not have stopped this sooner?"

    Well who's Mister Gloomypants today?

    Look on the bright side, they might level Coventry AGAIN, then we can start over
    If they nuke Slough & Bedford, does that mean that Putin will be liable for the enormous capital gains on property there?
    "Come friendly bombs …"
  • Options
    MuesliMuesli Posts: 90

    Carnyx said:

    Logs on, finds there are more squabbles than a kindergarten after the wrong kind of synthetic fizzy drink, and logs off again in the search for porridge.

    Agree, apart from the porridge. As a Guardian reader it was, of course muesli!
    Excellent choice.
  • Options
    CiceroCicero Posts: 2,207
    geoffw said:

    Alexei Navalny

    Sorry, a brainstorm, quite right.
This discussion has been closed.