Is it definite that the first suspect in custody is a shooter and not an innocent? The Germans nicked the wrong person at first the other day and its unusual to have an armed suspect arrested rather than shot in these scenarios in the US.
CBS saying shooter Esteban Santiago is from NJ and was bearing multiple weapons and wearing a "dark uniform". None of the media I'm watching are reporting any suggestion that there are confirmed other shooters. Live footage is showing police on alert; searching areas, crouched behind vehicles with rifles etc.
Try Fox, or the Live Audio Feed
Fox currently saying "no evidence" of a second shooter.
But they are quoting the local sheriff who says there IS a 2nd shooter
I agree, tho: very confused. The controllers on the live audio were adamant about a 2nd shooter... But could just be panic.
CBS saying that police on site beginning to calm down. There is a parking garage that's still being searched but it seems the police activity there is diminishing.
Yes this could just be panic, as I say.
What is amazing is that you could hear the panic spread (if that's what it is) on the Audio Feed.
Like a kind of Chinese Whispers on crystal meth.
The police here have heard of the phrase "proportionate response" but have decided that's for pinko liberal Yurpeens. You may recall the incident a couple of years ago when the NYPD took out a guy who shot his former boss outside the Empire State Building and the coppers managed to wound NINE passers by in the process.
LOL! They can't find anybody at all for any of the Sunday morning TV and radio, really?
Maybe their thinking is that if everyone forgets what Labour stands for right now, their polling numbers might not go below 20% before the May elections?
MSNBC saying there are claims that the shooter came in from Canada on an Air Canada flight, but this seems spurious. At least one eyewitness has said he saw the shooter come into baggage reclaim from outside.
Is it definite that the first suspect in custody is a shooter and not an innocent? The Germans nicked the wrong person at first the other day and its unusual to have an armed suspect arrested rather than shot in these scenarios in the US.
CBS saying shooter Esteban Santiago is from NJ and was bearing multiple weapons and wearing a "dark uniform". None of the media I'm watching are reporting any suggestion that there are confirmed other shooters. Live footage is showing police on alert; searching areas, crouched behind vehicles with rifles etc.
Try Fox, or the Live Audio Feed
Fox currently saying "no evidence" of a second shooter.
But they are quoting the local sheriff who says there IS a 2nd shooter
I agree, tho: very confused. The controllers on the live audio were adamant about a 2nd shooter... But could just be panic.
CBS saying that police on site beginning to calm down. There is a parking garage that's still being searched but it seems the police activity there is diminishing.
Yes this could just be panic, as I say.
What is amazing is that you could hear the panic spread (if that's what it is) on the Audio Feed.
Like a kind of Chinese Whispers on crystal meth.
The police here have heard of the phrase "proportionate response" but have decided that's for pinko liberal Yurpeens. You may recall the incident a couple of years ago when the NYPD took out a guy who shot his former boss outside the Empire State Building and the coppers managed to wound NINE passers by in the process.
It shows in the difference between the two countries (UK, US) on advice to the public on terrorist, marauding incidents. Run, hide, fight (US) vs Run, hide, tell (UK).
Just announced shooter's name is Esteban Santiago - had a military ID on him. Unclear if ID is real. - FL Sen Bill Nelson on CNN, says he got it from head of TSA - Adm Neffinger.
Certainly never heard of a Muslim called Esteban before, maybe not ISIS after all
Howabout one called Dave?
We have no idea whether this is islamic terrorism or not at this stage but do bear in mind you can't just go by a name. Leaving "Dave" aside, it could have been false ID or even someone who converted.
ISIS welcomes all who bow to its strict interpretation of the Sunnah.
LOL! They can't find anybody at all for any of the Sunday morning TV and radio, really?
Maybe their thinking is that if everyone forgets what Labour stands for right now, their polling numbers might not go below 20% before the May elections?
Kremlinology - what does it say about Diane or John if they are not on...?
Looks like some of the people on the tarmac are being let back into the terminals at last. And Broward Cty Sheriff is starting a presser.
Sheriff: 13 shot, 8 being treated in hospital, 5 dead. SWAT teams clearing whole airport to ensure it's safe. Shooter in custody, unharmed, no shots fired by BCSO. FBI and BCSO are interviewing suspect.
MSNBC saying there are claims that the shooter came in from Canada on an Air Canada flight, but this seems spurious. At least one eyewitness has said he saw the shooter come into baggage reclaim from outside.
Didn't think so, I thought it was basically a retirement town of old people.
I think the name stems from a nineteenth century fort from the Seminole wars. Lots of hotels, and quite smart waterways. The intracoastal starts here and it is also the main port for southern Florida, with lots of cruise ships. It blends into North Miami, but is newer and posher, albeit less historically interesting than Miami Beach. I was there a couple of years ago for a conference.
CBS saying the Broward Cty Commisioner says the suspect was on flight from Canada with checked gun, he claimed it from the carousel and went into a bathroom to load it, came out firing.
CBS saying the Broward Cty Commisioner says the suspect was on flight from Canada with checked gun, he claimed it from the carousel and went into a bathroom to load it, came out firing.
Didn't think so, I thought it was basically a retirement town of old people.
I think the name stems from a nineteenth century fort from the Seminole wars. Lots of hotels, and quite smart waterways. The intracoastal starts here and it is also the main port for southern Florida, with lots of cruise ships. It blends into North Miami, but is newer and posher, albeit less historically interesting than Miami Beach. I was there a couple of years ago for a conference.
The downtown area with the canals and big conference hotels is very pretty.
It also has a reputation as a Spring Break party town.
Sheriff: No confirmation of any shooting other than at baggage area. No one else in custody.
Have you got the live feed?
They're freaking out. Again it's probably just panic.
Someone just said "we have people barricaded in a room with guns"....
No, watching the authorities' press conference. I really wouldn't get too excited about the live feed - fog of war and all that.
Indeed. The Fire and Rescue were completely convinced there was a second shooter. Said it emphatically, "multiple eye-witnesses". Yet complete bollocks, it seems...?
Dear god it's addictive - "two bodies"..."are they yellows or reds?"
CBS saying the Broward Cty Commisioner says the suspect was on flight from Canada with checked gun, he claimed it from the carousel and went into a bathroom to load it, came out firing.
Suspect name now given as Esteban Santiago Ruiz.
The mind does boggle at the gun culture here sometimes.
CBS saying the Broward Cty Commisioner says the suspect was on flight from Canada with checked gun, he claimed it from the carousel and went into a bathroom to load it, came out firing.
Suspect name now given as Esteban Santiago Ruiz.
The mind does boggle at the gun culture here sometimes.
Yeah CBS is asking Sen Nelson whether this means all guns should be banned from checked luggage and he's "won't anybody think of the hunters?"
CBS saying the Broward Cty Commisioner says the suspect was on flight from Canada with checked gun, he claimed it from the carousel and went into a bathroom to load it, came out firing.
Suspect name now given as Esteban Santiago Ruiz.
The mind does boggle at the gun culture here sometimes.
Yeah CBS is asking Sen Nelson whether this means all guns should be banned from checked luggage and he's "won't anybody think of the hunters?"
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Hope the wait was worth the payout. Glad to see Jack's ARSE did come up with a couple of winners in the secondary markets at least.
Jack's always had an excellent record on turnout, even if the band didn't look like being the winner earlier we should always remember how slowly the coasts count.
Sheriff: No confirmation of any shooting other than at baggage area. No one else in custody.
Have you got the live feed?
They're freaking out. Again it's probably just panic.
Someone just said "we have people barricaded in a room with guns"....
No, watching the authorities' press conference. I really wouldn't get too excited about the live feed - fog of war and all that.
Indeed. The Fire and Rescue were completely convinced there was a second shooter. Said it emphatically, "multiple eye-witnesses". Yet complete bollocks, it seems...?
Let's hope it is, but in a land where most people seem to be armed routinely, how can anyone tell an attacker from a defender?
Hope the wait was worth the payout. Glad to see Jack's ARSE did come up with a couple of winners in the secondary markets at least.
Jack's always had an excellent record on turnout, even if the band didn't look like being the winner earlier we should always remember how slowly the coasts count.
Has anyone seen JackW? Hope the old boy is OK.
Rather bruised ego, I think, given his cocksure and strident pronouncements on Trump and the electoral college.
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Best guess: this isn't Islamic, it's a lone and random sad nutter, with a grudge against Trump/America/the world.
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
Amazing - the Gunman in Fort Lauderdale boarded the aircraft in Alaska and had a checked gun in his baggage, he went into the toilets in baggage reclaim, and opened fire
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the primary debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Best guess: this isn't Islamic, it's a lone and random sad nutter, with a grudge against Trump/America/the world.
And a lesson in how panic spreads.
says Corporal SeanT Jones...
Yes. Though you should have heard the livefeed. Better than any TV. Utterly compelling.
The PB Thread when BJO was live posting from a Tunisian hotel during the massacre was really quite the most bizarre bit of globalisation that I have encountered.
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Yeah that's where the whole story fails, before the election the Democrats dismissed the DNC email leaks as irrelevant tittle-tattle, and afterwards they now seem them as a smoking gun for a plot that cost them the Whitehouse. You can't have it both ways, it either mattered or not, it didn't start to matter only after Trump won.
Besides that I don't think that the DNC link, or Clinton's email server, had much salience. I think that things like failing to campaign in key states, and calling Republicans "deplorables", and Clinton's already tarnished reputation might have swung it.
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
I understand that some were edited, and certainly they were selectively leaked in a manner designed to embarrass the Democrats and distract their campaign.
Maybe only a few were swayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
Sounds like it's in the baggage claim, which is landside.
FWIW an airport is a very ISIS-y target. Spreads terror around travelling. More impact than some casual drive-by in the street.
On the other hand the shooter is apparently alive and in custody (how the hell do you manage that against armed US cops??), which is not very ISIS-y at all.
Wasn't there a mass panic at a US airport a couple of months ago, the descriptions of which were quite horrifying? Doesn't take much to cause a lot of deaths and injuries.
Yes, JFK I think.
LAX I recall. Which is probably the 9th circle of hell at the best of times.
I stand corrected.
Yes, LAX is truly horrible.
America has really shite airports. And rubbish airlines.
And a couple of decent ones, like JetBlue and Virgin America. And it's not like BA is anything to write home about these days.
I agree that most American airports are a s**tshow, and the way that domestic baggage reclaim is open to anyone who wants to walk off the street was probably the reason it was targetted in this incident.
To be honest, all commercial airlines are shit. If you have to travel, it's best to just charter.
(True story time. I was at a party, and there was a loud, drunk and obnoxious person there. She said "My husband and I went to India for Christmas, and - of course - we flew First Class." I couldn't hold myself back. I looked her in the eye and said, in a voice of utter incredulity "You fly commercial???")
((I don't really charter planes.))
A friend just offered me a seat on his plane from SF to Teleride for a cheeky long weekend in the mountains. Had to decline as I have a breakfast meeting on Friday
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
I understand that some were edited, and certainly they were selectively leaked in a manner designed to embarrass the Democrats and distract their campaign.
Maybe only a few werecswayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
I thought the entire collection of emails was leaked? A few may have appeared more prominently than others (the Sanders bashing ones, for instance).
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
I understand that some were edited, and certainly they were selectively leaked in a manner designed to embarrass the Democrats and distract their campaign.
Maybe only a few were swayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
The bottom line is that Hillary Clinton lost because she was Hillary Clinton. Her misuse of e mails was common knowledge and I doubt many were influenced by the hacking
The Democrats need to accept they lost because of their candidate as almost any other Democrat would have won relatively easily
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
I understand that some were edited, and certainly they were selectively leaked in a manner designed to embarrass the Democrats and distract their campaign.
Maybe only a few were swayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
They weren't edited. That allegation came from a news report that misattributed some content in one of them but nobody has ever question the authenticity of the emails as published by wikileaks.
The state of emergency is now in effect -they said the rain would start at 2pm and it did. Temperature are dropping and will reach freezing in an hour or so, so it will switch to sleet and freezing rain before turning to snow overnight. We're expecting about 4 inches.
Local TV stations have suspended regular programming and have wall to wall weather coverage. They have correspondents all over the ATL metro, for example WSB "Severe Storm Team 2" and Action News folks are breathlessly reporting every flurry and sleet report, and traffic jams. HD Radar, interactive traffic flow maps - you name it they have it.
The Weather Channel, a nationwide channel has reporters all over Atlanta, and shows all the various models showing projected snowfall etc. (The Weather Channel studios are in Atlanta).
One has to wonder how viewers in Fargo, Bismarck or International Falls view this saturation coverage of a 4 inch snow storm, (which will shut the place down for 2 to 3 days) compared to what they regularly get. I suspect either a wry smile or just outright contempt for southern wusses.
It is almost mesmeric to watch though - an enjoyable slow motion train wreck
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
I understand that some were edited, and certainly they were selectively leaked in a manner designed to embarrass the Democrats and distract their campaign.
Maybe only a few werecswayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
I thought the entire collection of emails was leaked? A few may have appeared more prominently than others (the Sanders bashing ones, for instance).
They were all leaked then spammed everywhere by Plato's alt.right twitter mates.
No two ways about it. Trump is Putin's bitch.
The Russians were blatent about it, so imagine what they were doing behind the scenes, and what they hacked from the Republicans.
Although I am still not clear how the hacking was supposed to have influenced the election.
Weren't the hacks spread all over the media over the summer and endlessly discussed in the media while the American public were deciding how to vote. Just a guess...
I can't even remember one salacious bit of info from the DNC emails, apart from perhaps Clinton being given the debate questions before hand. Still, assuming the emails were genuine (a somewhat big if), it means in the end they were influenced by the truth?
I understand that some were edited, and certainly they were selectively leaked in a manner designed to embarrass the Democrats and distract their campaign.
Maybe only a few werecswayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
I thought the entire collection of emails was leaked? A few may have appeared more prominently than others (the Sanders bashing ones, for instance).
They were all leaked then spammed everywhere by Plato's alt.right twitter mates.
No two ways about it. Trump is Putin's bitch.
The Russians were blatent about it, so imagine what they were doing behind the scenes, and what they hacked from the Republicans.
So they weren't selectively leaked? I can understand some featuring more prominently in the news though.
Has it actually been shown he asked them to do this for him? if not, I don't see how this makes anyone anyones bitch.
If they were so blatant about it, why did it take so long for the CIA/FBI to do anything about it, perhaps before the actual election took place?
Hope the wait was worth the payout. Glad to see Jack's ARSE did come up with a couple of winners in the secondary markets at least.
Jack's always had an excellent record on turnout, even if the band didn't look like being the winner earlier we should always remember how slowly the coasts count.
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Best guess: this isn't Islamic, it's a lone and random sad nutter, with a grudge against Trump/America/the world.
And a lesson in how panic spreads.
says Corporal SeanT Jones...
Yes. Though you should have heard the livefeed. Better than any TV. Utterly compelling.
The PB Thread when BJO was live posting from a Tunisian hotel during the massacre was really quite the most bizarre bit of globalisation that I have encountered.
He did?? Respect to Mr Owls.
He was live posting, and PBers were posting both advice and news updates on the security search.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
If they were so blatant about it, why did it take so long for the CIA/FBI to do anything about it, perhaps before the actual election took place?
Probably because the CIA do just the same in Russia and other countries. They're just miffed that they have possibly been outplayed at their own game. The denouement will probably be some kind of agreement that both sides will tell the troll farms to stand down.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
With respect that is just silly - we want a PM with integrity not one bought off by big business
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
Tory voters back hard Brexit over soft Brexit by a 13% margin, May is more likely to lose her majority if she fails to control free movement and sees mass defections to UKIP than if she fails to appease 1 donor by not keeping full access to the single market https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/810116884850941953?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
Not saying it hasn't happened, just saying it's probably not the best look!
I know he has his critics, but Andrew Feldman was phenomenal in raising funds for the Tories whilst Dave was in charge, Mrs May will struggle to replace him.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
This one will not change policy to suit her donors
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
Strange things do happen. Cameron couldn't get a majority vs Brown after the worst financial crash in living memory
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
It is very *courageous* of Mrs May to put all her faith in Corbyn still being there.
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Best guess: this isn't Islamic, it's a lone and random sad nutter, with a grudge against Trump/America/the world.
And a lesson in how panic spreads.
says Corporal SeanT Jones...
Yes. Though you should have heard the livefeed. Better than any TV. Utterly compelling.
The PB Thread when BJO was live posting from a Tunisian hotel during the massacre was really quite the most bizarre bit of globalisation that I have encountered.
He did?? Respect to Mr Owls.
He was live posting, and PBers were posting both advice and news updates on the security search.
The Russians were blatent about it, so imagine what they were doing behind the scenes, and what they hacked from the Republicans.
That kind of evidence free alluding to interference is exactly the sort of thing the Russians say about Ukraine.
They leaked transcripts of State Department officials obviously trying to fix the new government in Ukraine before the events that led to Yanukovych fleeing. That's not evidence free.
The importance of money in elections is overrated, Trump beat Hillary despite spending significantly less than she did. Given a choice between losing some money and losing your base you choose the former
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
It is very *courageous* of Mrs May to put all her faith in Corbyn still being there.
Something about hubris and nemesis spring to mind
Do you seriously think her policy on Brexit takes into account Corbyn leading or not leading the labour party
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
Strange things do happen. Cameron couldn't get a majority vs Brown after the worst financial crash in living memory
Alot of people always vote for the incumbent government despite what they tell pollsters. Makes the runes look even worse for Corbyn if anything.
Probably because the CIA do just the same in Russia and other countries. They're just miffed that they have possibly been outplayed at their own game. The denouement will probably be some kind of agreement that both sides will tell the troll farms to stand down.
They haven't been outplayed, the DNC had terrible security, much like Clinton's email server. If anything that's part of the problem in identifying the culprit, it wasn't the technical means that shows it was the Russians, it is more likely intelligence that the NSA has about where the attack came from that shows that. The IC doesn't want to disclose such sources of intelligence to the public, so instead we end up with all this secret briefing and alluding to things we can't be told.
More generally though it is an almost certainty that the Americans do the same to the Russians. There was a story in 2013 that the Kremlin has started using mechanical typewriters for its most important communications, which makes sense when you consider where most computer hardware is designed and manufactured, and most of the software is written. i.e. Not in Russia.
"Mass shootings: There were 372 mass shootings in the US in 2015, killing 475 people and wounding 1,870, according to the Mass Shooting Tracker, which catalogues such incidents. A mass shooting is defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant."
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Best guess: this isn't Islamic, it's a lone and random sad nutter, with a grudge against Trump/America/the world.
And a lesson in how panic spreads.
says Corporal SeanT Jones...
Yes. Though you should have heard the livefeed. Better than any TV. Utterly compelling.
The PB Thread when BJO was live posting from a Tunisian hotel during the massacre was really quite the most bizarre bit of globalisation that I have encountered.
He did?? Respect to Mr Owls.
He was live posting, and PBers were posting both advice and news updates on the security search.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
It is very *courageous* of Mrs May to put all her faith in Corbyn still being there.
Something about hubris and nemesis spring to mind
I'll bet against Don Brind's fantasies all day long and twice on sundays.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
Leaving the Single Market may dent this guy's business. Corbyn would turn the UK into Venezuela. I suspect he will cough up if Labour rise in the polls.
It's all about pressure, to use my favourite expression, it's like playing Russian roulette with a fully loaded gun.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
Rich donors do have influence, parties say they don't but it is ridiculous to say donors don't lobby their views. Whether a PM or LOTO takes on board somebodies views is another question, I should imagine some donors have quite dotty opinions on some subjects.
In regard to this particular donor, if leaving the single market ruins his business why would you donate to a party that makes your life more difficult? A similar process goes on once a party gains power as the new government makes decisions that gradually make some people's lives who voted them in more difficult. I voted Tory in 2015 but will not vote for them in 2020 or whenever the next GE is called. I don't blame the former donor for withdrawing his funding, if it means a hung parliament and Brexit has not been executed he gets what he wants.....
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
You mean Prime Ministers have never based/changed policy on what donors wish it to be?
May has Carte Blanche, all the models point to overwhelming wins at the next GE right now. If Labour didn't have Corbyn it might be different, but they do. So it isn't.
It is very *courageous* of Mrs May to put all her faith in Corbyn still being there.
Something about hubris and nemesis spring to mind
Do you seriously think her policy on Brexit takes into account Corbyn leading or not leading the labour party
Well, yes. Having no opposition gives her more freedom of movement (if you'll pardon the expression). Obviously.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
Rich donors do have influence, parties say they don't but it is ridiculous to say donors don't lobby their views. Whether a PM or LOTO takes on board somebodies views is another question, I should imagine some donors have quite dotty opinions on some subjects.
In regard to this particular donor, if leaving the single market ruins his business why would you donate to a party that makes your life more difficult? A similar process goes on once a party gains power as the new government makes decisions that gradually make some people's lives who voted them in more difficult. I voted Tory in 2015 but will not vote for them in 2020 or whenever the next GE is called. I don't blame the former donor for withdrawing his funding, if it means a hung parliament and Brexit has not been executed he gets what he wants.....
And if it means that A50 has been triggered, May loses and Corbyn gets in, and turns Britain into a nightmare state, separated from the EU, what does he get then?
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
Tory voters back hard Brexit over soft Brexit by a 13% margin, May is more likely to lose her majority if she fails to control free movement and sees mass defections to UKIP than if she fails to appease I donor by keeping full access to the single market https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/810116884850941953?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Hm. May is (as ever) stuck between a rock and a hard place. More of her party want Hard Brexit than Soft, but that means pursuing a policy supported by only one third of voters. So pursuing HB will stop some Tories voting Ukip, but risks leaking more support to the LibDems.
The irony of her "Brexit means Brexit" line is that it's a lot truer for the EU than it is for her. Leaving the EU means leaving the single market and ending free movement. The idea that she "is preparing to give an ultimatum to the European Union that the UK will quit the single market unless it is allowed to opt out of free movement rules" ( https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/theresa-may/news/82099/theresa-may-prioritise ) is risible.
The EU will do a Norway-style (Soft Brexit) deal with the UK if the UK is willing to accept the EU's terms, no more, no less.
Trump is going to be a terrible POTUS, he has an extreme agenda which he has gently recanted on to get past the blocks that impede him getting power. He then reiterates his original view once any threat to him succeeding Obama recedes. Basically him taking office may mean we will all die sooner rather than later, he is a dangerous extremist. I noticed Corbyn, who is dangerous due to him being the other extreme have similar strategies that indicate he is not as bad as you think, only for him later to reiterate his original opinion. All extreme politicians go through this process. Frankly those who do not see Trump for the dangerous maniac he is want to hope the UK is not dragged into another war that he accidentally starts.
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
What's he gonna do, stop funding the Tories so Corbyn's Labour has a better chance of winning?
Exactly. He has nowhere to go.
No, it forces pressure on Mrs May, Labour via the Unions are well funded, does Mrs May really want to go down in history as the Tory leader that didn't win a majority against Corbyn.
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
And how good would it look if she changed her policy based on what a few rich donors wanted?
Rich donors do have influence, parties say they don't but it is ridiculous to say donors don't lobby their views. Whether a PM or LOTO takes on board somebodies views is another question, I should imagine some donors have quite dotty opinions on some subjects.
In regard to this particular donor, if leaving the single market ruins his business why would you donate to a party that makes your life more difficult? A similar process goes on once a party gains power as the new government makes decisions that gradually make some people's lives who voted them in more difficult. I voted Tory in 2015 but will not vote for them in 2020 or whenever the next GE is called. I don't blame the former donor for withdrawing his funding, if it means a hung parliament and Brexit has not been executed he gets what he wants.....
So he leaves the Tories and gives a bit of money to the LDs, so what. Far more damaging to May would be a dripping wet, soft Brexit with no new migration controls at all, continued payments to the EU and continued ECJ jurisdiction over the UK and a result something like Labour 27% UKIP 26% Tory 24%, Corbyn PM in deal with SNP
Comments
Maybe their thinking is that if everyone forgets what Labour stands for right now, their polling numbers might not go below 20% before the May elections?
Took them a while !
What was the turnout in the end?
Sheriff: 13 shot, 8 being treated in hospital, 5 dead. SWAT teams clearing whole airport to ensure it's safe. Shooter in custody, unharmed, no shots fired by BCSO. FBI and BCSO are interviewing suspect.
Turns out @JackW ARSE did get one right
And H Clinton PV I guess !
Suspect name now given as Esteban Santiago Ruiz.
It also has a reputation as a Spring Break party town.
Edit: "yellows at this time.."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34996604
In other words, this is a rather entry-level example of what was a more frequent than daily occurrence in 2015. If it weren't at an international airport we would not have heard of it.
It is a constant mystery to me that the richest country in history tolerates third-world levels of risk of being shot to death, and of dying of disease because medical care is unaffordable.
Someone is going to end up in serious shit for that I think.
Good evening, everyone.
Not that he was alone.
Not a bad story for our intelligence services.
That is seriously mad and unbelievable
Besides that I don't think that the DNC link, or Clinton's email server, had much salience. I think that things like failing to campaign in key states, and calling Republicans "deplorables", and Clinton's already tarnished reputation might have swung it.
Maybe only a few were swayed, but now Trump is Putin's bitch.
The Democrats need to accept they lost because of their candidate as almost any other Democrat would have won relatively easily
Local TV stations have suspended regular programming and have wall to wall weather coverage. They have correspondents all over the ATL metro, for example WSB "Severe Storm Team 2" and Action News folks are breathlessly reporting every flurry and sleet report, and traffic jams. HD Radar, interactive traffic flow maps - you name it they have it.
The Weather Channel, a nationwide channel has reporters all over Atlanta, and shows all the various models showing projected snowfall etc. (The Weather Channel studios are in Atlanta).
One has to wonder how viewers in Fargo, Bismarck or International Falls view this saturation coverage of a 4 inch snow storm, (which will shut the place down for 2 to 3 days) compared to what they regularly get. I suspect either a wry smile or just outright contempt for southern wusses.
It is almost mesmeric to watch though - an enjoyable slow motion train wreck
I posted exactly that after the Tory conference and a few PBers pooh-poohed it.
See my sources were right, Brexit has the potential to lead to a donors' strike it.
No two ways about it. Trump is Putin's bitch.
The Russians were blatent about it, so imagine what they were doing behind the scenes, and what they hacked from the Republicans.
I do not think she will be impressed by donor blackmail
Has it actually been shown he asked them to do this for him? if not, I don't see how this makes anyone anyones bitch.
If they were so blatant about it, why did it take so long for the CIA/FBI to do anything about it, perhaps before the actual election took place?
Why give you money to someone who ruins your business.
Oh wait
https://twitter.com/keiranpedley/status/810116884850941953?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
https://twitter.com/VicenteFoxQue/status/817480450285375488
Something about hubris and nemesis spring to mind
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/06/26/don-brind-says-labour-hopefuls-know-their-partys-future-isnt-in-their-hands/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26079957
More generally though it is an almost certainty that the Americans do the same to the Russians. There was a story in 2013 that the Kremlin has started using mechanical typewriters for its most important communications, which makes sense when you consider where most computer hardware is designed and manufactured, and most of the software is written. i.e. Not in Russia.
In regard to this particular donor, if leaving the single market ruins his business why would you donate to a party that makes your life more difficult? A similar process goes on once a party gains power as the new government makes decisions that gradually make some people's lives who voted them in more difficult. I voted Tory in 2015 but will not vote for them in 2020 or whenever the next GE is called. I don't blame the former donor for withdrawing his funding, if it means a hung parliament and Brexit has not been executed he gets what he wants.....
And if it means that A50 has been triggered, May loses and Corbyn gets in, and turns Britain into a nightmare state, separated from the EU, what does he get then?
The irony of her "Brexit means Brexit" line is that it's a lot truer for the EU than it is for her. Leaving the EU means leaving the single market and ending free movement. The idea that she "is preparing to give an ultimatum to the European Union that the UK will quit the single market unless it is allowed to opt out of free movement rules" ( https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/theresa-may/news/82099/theresa-may-prioritise ) is risible.
The EU will do a Norway-style (Soft Brexit) deal with the UK if the UK is willing to accept the EU's terms, no more, no less.