Reform

Wisbech Eagle said:
Who suggested that popular people shouldn’t be accepted? There’s a huge difference between being popular and being Trump. Some people are popular for good reasons. Others are so obviously frauds that any respectable party would find a way to avoid them.

It’s nothing like Iran stopping reformists. That’s a ridiculous suggestion.

It just wasn’t and isn’t what happened. That the Democrats possess more compassion than hardline Trump supporters is to their credit, but seeking to stain them by suggesting that they opened the doors purely to gain votes is nonsense.
Click to expand...
Well is that slur any different to saying trump started on Iran to get his mates profits on oil. Glass houses
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
They come from many backgrounds these days with as much life experience as others and more than most. Our current MP was previously a Solicitor and County Councillor and the one prior to that also sat on the Council but ran a farm, having attended agricultural college. Don’t think they could be described as unqualified! The most important ability being to know the limit of your knowledge, use experts to advise and possess the wisdom to evaluate the advice.
Click to expand...
That's alright then. If only the voters in America had known that two MPs in Cornwall had worked as a solicitor and a farmer they would obviously never have voted for Trump. Why was this information not more widely disseminated in the US?
 
cryrst said:
Well is that slur any different to saying trump started on Iran to get his mates profits on oil. Glass houses
Click to expand...
I didn’t say that, nor do I think that. It’s a side effect which Trump’s regular flip flopping enables. Whether he is bright enough to do it deliberately is dubious but there are others bright enough to exploit it.

I heard Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (Yale School of Management) interviewed the other day. Who is someone I hadn’t heard of before but has known Trump from way back. He has co authored a book examining Trump’s methodology. He doesn’t think Trump is stupid but he does think he is extremely ignorant, knowing next to nothing about many vital issues that any President ought to be master of.

Trump started the war because of his ignorance.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
That's alright then. If only the voters in America had known that two MPs in Cornwall had worked as a solicitor and a farmer they would obviously never have voted for Trump. Why was this information not more widely disseminated in the US?
Click to expand...
Don’t be ridiculous. That was merely a counter to your suggestion that politicians lack life experience, when most these days have gained quite a lot before entering politics. Gone are the days when they went straight from Eton into the Cabinet.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Don’t be ridiculous. That was merely a counter to your suggestion that politicians lack life experience, when most these days have gained quite a lot before entering politics. Gone are the days when they went straight from Eton into the Cabinet.
Click to expand...
And the relevance of that to American politics is?
 
cryrst said:
By default ?
Is this also by the fact that postal voting will be stopped so ending a form of fraud and more people vote for Vance.
Click to expand...
You don't actually believe all that?

He wins it's a victory for democracy.

He loses it's electoral fraud.

He's a worse loser than my 11 year old son.

A giant octogenarian baby.
 
beak said:
Are you possibly referring to Sir Keir Starmer? He was NOT a sir before taking over this highly troubled department legal cases were crashing the police had no guidelines on wether a prosecution was possible , Sir Keir brought order to a chaotic mess,I have several policemen friends who have a view that he did a very good job, yes we know our venal press as usual made up hostile stories that the very gullible swallowed wholesale. So why did the Tories make him a sir?
Click to expand...

beak; you may suffer from a low boredom threshold…but I suffer from a low bullshit threshold.

I was in custody suites on a weekly basis prior to Sir Kier Starmer’s appointment as DPP in 2008, I served from 1989 to 2025.

We had thorough and detailed charging guidelines following the implementation of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. By 2006 (2 years before Starmer’s appointment) we were fully up to speed with the new guidelines and it was a very straightforward process;

For minor summary cases we still had charging authority and the custody officer would make the decision re charging. For more serious summary cases and indictable cases we sent an MG3 to the CPS for a charging decision. We followed the guidelines of the CJA 2003 in the submission of this form and we received the prosecutors advice from the CPS, usually within an hour of submission.

The comments which I have highlighted are simply untrue and strike me as just pure fabricated waffle to try and support your argument. We had very clear and straightforward guidelines on charging and prosecution and to suggest otherwise is quite frankly absurd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top