Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2016 9:31:19 GMT -5
You're a bit late with the whole "right now polls are being cast" thing. The voting is done and the results are in favor of leaving. That aside, please. It costs the average Brit like what, a pound a week being in the EU? What a huge financial burden. It's like they forget the perks of being in it. Could really disrupt some people's work if they have to travel between the countries. The whole argument that the EU will consume them and they'll lose their identity is absurd. The EU has almost no power to begin with. The only reason people are at the point where they want to leave is the idea that it will prevent migrants from coming into Britain. I'd bet on them not even leaving after this since parliament still has to decide to follow the referendum, and they'll get away without following it if they push the "look at how the pound is doing after this vote! we need to stay to prevent a crisis!!!"Never mind that last part, Cameron is resigning so I'm assuming that they'll follow the vote. Well, good luck to them. Every economist predicts they'll do worse without the EU. This is what happens when dumb citizens believe dumb populist and nationalistic politicians. Britain is fucked.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2016 11:12:09 GMT -5
You're a bit late with the whole "right now polls are being cast" thing. The voting is done and the results are in favor of leaving. That aside, please. It costs the average Brit like what, a pound a week being in the EU? What a huge financial burden. It's like they forget the perks of being in it. Could really disrupt some people's work if they have to travel between the countries. The whole argument that the EU will consume them and they'll lose their identity is absurd. The EU has almost no power to begin with. The only reason people are at the point where they want to leave is the idea that it will prevent migrants from coming into Britain. I'd bet on them not even leaving after this since parliament still has to decide to follow the referendum, and they'll get away without following it if they push the "look at how the pound is doing after this vote! we need to stay to prevent a crisis!!!"Never mind that last part, Cameron is resigning so I'm assuming that they'll follow the vote. Well, good luck to them. Every economist predicts they'll do worse without the EU. They certainly remember the downsides of being in it. I take it Turkey joining the EU doesn't have that much to do with this, then? Also- the NYT posted a heat map of the 52/48 vote in favour to leave.
|
|
Slick
True Bro
Taking the piss
Posts: 1,015
|
Post by Slick on Jun 24, 2016 13:33:39 GMT -5
I got my popcorn, and a bag of salt and sugar. I'm indifferent because I couldn't vote for an outcome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2016 15:05:14 GMT -5
happy independence day lads just wanna point out that this coincides with the release of independence day 2 I guess the UK wanted to feel like America for a day. Who can blame them, really?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2016 14:11:10 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2016 21:58:59 GMT -5
Couldn't find a picture of Britain's economy possibly suffering in the future- I guess the reaction image by itself works fine. EDIT: The most dire consequence of BREXIT passing: Britain is removed from Eurotruck Simulator.
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Jun 26, 2016 0:43:30 GMT -5
But...Norway and Switzerland are in there and neither are part of the EU.
|
|
Will
True Bro
K/D below 1.0
Posts: 1,309
|
Post by Will on Jun 26, 2016 14:01:52 GMT -5
|
|
bradman
True Bro
token old guy
Posts: 1,178
|
Post by bradman on Jun 27, 2016 11:09:41 GMT -5
The Wogs begin at Calais.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2016 17:06:47 GMT -5
So far the narrative to the post-Brexit fallout is that global economic crisis could be happening very soon.
EDIT: Lol no it's not. The UK is currently using their leverage to negotiate better trade deals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2016 13:31:11 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2016/07/06/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-email-comey.htmlFBI Chief James Comey got up and announced the FBI investigation on Hillary Clinton's emails is complete. He announced that the FBI looked through all 30 000 of her emails, and that a modicum of federal crimes can be levelled against her. He also addressed the department of justice saying that he does not recommend charging her. I'm not entirely sure what that implies, but to a lot of people that means Comey is suggesting Hillary Clinton might just get off the hook for her federal crimes. Full speech here:
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Jul 7, 2016 13:59:45 GMT -5
he's saying that she didn't actually break the law, she only broke the spirit of the law. She should have known better, etc.
For the difference, compare this to what Patraeus did. He willfully disclosed confidential information to a journalist he was sleeping with. Whereas with Clinton, there's no evidence that she, or her colleagues, intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information. They were simply extremely careless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 0:48:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ChloeB42 (Alexcalibur42) on Jul 13, 2016 5:54:23 GMT -5
Yeah, they're going to try and get her on trying to avoid the Freedom of Information Act, but there's really no crime in that, and lying under oath in Washington means absolutely nothing nowadays. Besides push came to shove I wouldn't be surprised if Obama gave her a pardon if she did have charges pressed against her. Welcome to politics 101. Money, power, influence and connections are what turns the cogs in the political machine and it takes more than a wrench to clog it up.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Jul 13, 2016 8:18:37 GMT -5
|
|
pachiderm
True Bro
Chewing some serious leaves
Posts: 647
|
Post by pachiderm on Jul 13, 2016 9:57:05 GMT -5
It's honestly a bit of a stretch since no one can prove their was intentional wrong-doing, just that she was negligent. This isn't Richard Nixon ordering people to break into the DNC, this is easily explained as an old woman ignorant of the technology she's using and the ramifications of using it the way she is. The solution is education. An educated populace can make themselves informed on the issues and will be better equipped to see through demagoguery and cast their vote based on important policy decisions not just whether or not women should get abortions.
|
|
pachiderm
True Bro
Chewing some serious leaves
Posts: 647
|
Post by pachiderm on Jul 13, 2016 10:04:57 GMT -5
thats still a really bad quality for someone who has nuclear codes I'm not really a fan of Hillary either but whether or not we want to give her those codes is up to voters to decide. I'm just saying there wasn't really enough reason to indict her.
|
|
|
Post by blackbarney on Jul 13, 2016 10:26:53 GMT -5
thats still a really bad quality for someone who has nuclear codes She doesn't have the codes, the people around her have that. She just makes the call. You want someone with wisdom, not necessarily intelligence, to have that role. I think Hillary is perfectly qualified for such a position.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2016 13:15:36 GMT -5
It's honestly a bit of a stretch since no one can prove there was intentional wrong-doing, just that she was negligent. This isn't Richard Nixon ordering people to break into the DNC, this is easily explained as an old woman ignorant of the technology she's using and the ramifications of using it the way she is. But I have a Spongebob webm- that somehow means my point is stronger.
|
|
Will
True Bro
K/D below 1.0
Posts: 1,309
|
Post by Will on Jul 13, 2016 17:21:16 GMT -5
|
|
eLantern
True Bro
"Oh, cruel fate, to be thusly boned! Ask not for whom the bone bones, it bones for thee!" - Bender
Posts: 10,761
|
Post by eLantern on Jul 14, 2016 16:18:27 GMT -5
thats still a really bad quality for someone who has nuclear codes I'm not really a fan of Hillary either but whether or not we want to give her those codes is up to voters to decide. I'm just saying there wasn't really enough reason to indict her. The hell there wasn't. Tons of evidence was found indicating Hillary Clinton is incredibly guilty of criminal behavior. I'm sure that the no criminal charges recommendation has nothing to do with the fact that she's the Democratic Presidential Candidate and the Justice Department works under a Democratic controlled administration. Just about anyone else would be facing massive jail time for doing what she did; it's complete bullshit and it should have anyone and everyone pissed off and outraged regardless to their political affiliation. Hillary Clinton is a career politician and not some random 68 year old lady who's unaware of how technology works, so anyone trying to spin a bullshit story around that crap rhetoric needs to Foxtrot off. Hillary understood perfectly what she was doing and it really wouldn't be all that difficult for a prosecutor to charge her with criminal intent if she was a regular joe. Secondly, there are laws that she broke that don't involve mens rea (aka a requirement of criminal intent or knowledge); instead, the simple action of wrongdoing is all that matters for several of the statutes she violated (aka ignorance is no excuse). The receiving and sending of classified documents (many top secret or higher) on a private unprotected server (btw, it was less protected than a public gmail account) is one huge defacto violation of statute 44 US code 3101 (the Federal Records Law). Sindey Blumenthal (someone who the Obama administration specifically ordered her to not include as part of her department) was attached by Hillary Clinton to several classified email chains and sending emails to people who do not have the proper clearance authorization is a defacto violation of statute 18 US code 793(f) as was her deletion of emails she claimed were of "personal nature" yet were found to be of classified government business. Another relevant statute is 2 US code 192 which governs people who are under investigation, subpoena, or compelled by the government to produce records. Not only did Hillary initially refuse to produce her emails for investigation, but she then later decided for herself which ones were relevant and subsequently wiped her server clean of all remaining files/emails. It's impossible to know now whether or not she knowingly destroyed relevant evidence because those records are gone. Her intentional destruction of documents under Congressional inquiry also put her in direct violation of statute 18 US code 1519 and her obvious lies under oath puts her in violation of statute 18 US code 1621. These (except 18 US code 1621) are not statutes requiring a criminal intent or knowledge, but instead the simple action of wrongdoing is all that matters. For the love of God we just celebrated the 50th anniversary of The Freedom of Information Act at the federal level and any citizen who cares about the rule of law as well as the transparency of government should be outraged by Comey's recommendation. Many of these statutes were enacted in the first place to protect America's highest level secrets from being funneled through insecure channels where they could be intercepted. Hell, director Comey even acknowledged that the FBI believe that vital classified information was compromised and intercepted. As someone who has studied the law I'm flabbergasted in the director's recommendation to not pursue criminal charges after he laid out enough evidence to suggest that Hillary Clinton should be facing serious jail time; however, I'm not surprised that charges aren't being pressed by the Justice Department given the likely political pressure levied against it from the Democratic party. Let this be a lessen to us all that apparently political opinions in fact matter more than the law itself which is incredibly sad for We the People. I'll be honest, I don't think it's a coincidence that the FBI's announcement was setup 4 hours prior to Obama making his first public campaign appearance with Hillary Clinton.
|
|