During a campaign rally Tuesday night, Donald Trump urged his supporters to vote on November 28.
“Go and register. Make sure you get out vote November 28,” the GOP presidential nominee said at the event in Panama City, Florida.
Gold.
During a campaign rally Tuesday night, Donald Trump urged his supporters to vote on November 28.
“Go and register. Make sure you get out vote November 28,” the GOP presidential nominee said at the event in Panama City, Florida.
Gold.
I find no reason to disbelieve what Comey has testified so far and it should worry Trump fans that the Senate Intelligence Committee is treating his testimony as credible. Comey would have approached Trump knowing exactly what to expect. He's a lawyer and ex head of the FBI after all - he's no idiot. Accusations of partisanship seem weak when we know he was a registered republican right up until 2016 and that he has royally pissed off both sides of the political establishment.
Everything Comey has testified so far seems in line with what I would expect from Trump. If I'm to believe Comey is fibbing, I'd have expected him to use stronger language other than "I'm hoping" - as I said earlier, the case for obstruction is weak and it makes no sense that a seasoned attorney would fabricate a weak case that on its own is unlikely to go anywhere. That Trump emptied the room is a dead give away that he knew what he was doing was not kosher. If you think Comey would leak a baseless case for Obstruction and thats his end game, I would argue that you have grossly under-estimated the former FBI director.
As for the charge of perjury - well, that obviously hinges on Trump testifying against Comey which he has (astoundingly) offered to do. Of course, I don't believe anything that Trump has said so far. He has the least credibility of any President in modern history and has a decades old public profile as a as a chronic bullshitter. He has trouble sticking to message without the aid of a teleprompter. Comey knew before he leaked his notes that the logical conclusion from that action is Trump testifying.
FWIW, when I worked in finance, I recorded meetings on my phone quite regularly because some of the people I worked with were ethically questionable. It would not surprise me if Comey acted likewise whilst working under Trump.
We bought a Philips AirFryer XL about a year ago to try and wean ourselves off pan frying, to use as a potential substitute for deep frying and more importantly reduce the amount of oil we were consuming.
The idea was we'd use it for crumbed fish, chicken souvlaki / schnitzel, steak tips and maybe fries etc.
I've been really surprised at just how good it is.
Essentially, it's just a small convection oven with a turbo charged fan so I wasnt expecting much.
The drawer contains a basket where ones food goes however its possible to buy other fittings for baking etc.
It operates by way of dialing in the temperature and then starting the timer which means the default is "start and forget".
Its so small that it takes only 3 minutes to preheat to 200 degrees (I don't even bother preheating).
Everything cooks much quicker than in our convection oven - preheating our oven takes close to 10 minutes, and what takes 15 minutes in the oven takes 12 in the AirFryer (no preheating) which is great for when I get home drunk and want some spring rolls / crispy wontons / fries / pies.
Whats most important is the results and for our use, nine times out of ten they are better than what we would get from the convection oven (with the exceptions requiring a tweak to the recipe to get an equivalent or better result) and the cooking method lends itself towards very consistent results.
Generally speaking, the meat we cook in the AirFryer has a wonderfully browned all over crust and a moist juicy interior.
Crumbed Fish / Chicken is never soggy - its always perfectly crunchy and still really moist inside.
We cooked some cheap rump steak in it the other night and it was surprisingly good - as good as I could do in a pan.
I like my Sweet Potato Chips roasted until they are crispy with that caramel sweetness that comes out just before they burn and become inedible - 20 minutes in this baby with a slight shake at the 10 minute mark and I'm there.
Since we bought ours, our uncles / aunties and grandparents have all followed suit.
I find we dont use our convection oven nearly as much as we used too and our electricity bill has gone down too which is a nice bonus (our usage dropped 5-10% which I imagine is a function of operating a smaller, more efficient electronic appliance for a much smaller amount of time).
We still do roasts in the convection oven as we typically do shoulders which wouldn't work well in an AirFryer however I have seen folk do Pork Belly / Butterflied Lamb Legs with great results.
I cant say that its a perfect deep fryer replacement however we now dont find ourselves wondering whether we should buy a deep fryer.
My only gripe with it is its a bit on the small side for a family of five (and we have an xl model). We could probably do with two if we had the space however Im happy to cook in batches as we can do the kids first and let theirs cool down whilst ours is cooking.
Having joined a facebook page where people share their recipes and usage, its been interesting to see just how people are using them. Theres a reasonable number of mobile people who take them with them so they can cook on the road as its easy to use for eggs (come out similar to poached), bacon, chops etc and many use them as they dont have an oven.
In Summary:
Pros
Cons
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@phoenetia said in US Politics:
I find no reason to disbelieve what Comey has testified so far and it should worry Trump fans that the Senate Intelligence Committee is treating his testimony as credible. Comey would have approached Trump knowing exactly what to expect. He's a lawyer and ex head of the FBI after all - he's no idiot. Accusations of partisanship seem weak when we know he was a registered republican right up until 2016 and that he has royally pissed off both sides of the political establishment.
Everything Comey has testified so far seems in line with what I would expect from Trump. If I'm to believe Comey is fibbing, I'd have expected him to use stronger language other than "I'm hoping" - as I said earlier, the case for obstruction is weak and it makes no sense that a seasoned attorney would fabricate a weak case that on its own is unlikely to go anywhere. That Trump emptied the room is a dead give away that he knew what he was doing was not kosher. If you think Comey would leak a baseless case for Obstruction and thats his end game, I would argue that you have grossly under-estimated the former FBI director.As for the charge of perjury - well, that obviously hinges on Trump testifying against Comey which he has (astoundingly) offered to do. Of course, I don't believe anything that Trump has said so far. He has the least credibility of any President in modern history and has a decades old public profile as a as a chronic bullshitter. He has trouble sticking to message without the aid of a teleprompter. Comey knew before he leaked his notes that the logical conclusion from that action is Trump testifying.
FWIW, when I worked in finance, I recorded meetings on my phone quite regularly because some of the people I worked with were ethically questionable. It would not surprise me if Comey acted likewise whilst working under Trump.
Source for where the committee sees Comey as credible and actually believe him??? Remember the committee is more than just Democrats.
Comey by his actions as outlined previously has shown himself to be corruptible and dishonest. I don't believe much of anything he says. He folded for Lynch in the most pathetic way. About the only thing not released or leaked from the FBI over the last few months was the fact that Trump was not under investigation. Comeys reasoning.... he might be at some stage. That is monumentally pathetic excuse. It is like the police refusing to say that soemone is not under investigation for child molesting.. because one day they might be. FFS
As fr the rest of your post, it just comes down you not liking Trump and fitting the narrative to that. I dont know who is telling the truth, but I know that Comey is far FAR from credible.If he is so competent, why would he allow Lynch to tell him to refer to it as a 'matter' not an investigation? Why would he not record or note about meetings with her after that? He said he was concerned... yeah right.
And that doesnt even mention his complete and utter over reach on the Clinton result.
The Committee did next to nothing to attack the credibility of Comeys testimony. They essentially just let it speak for itself. It was quite striking, I had expected otherwise.
You've argued that Comey is not credible for a number of reasons yet the Committee has not argued accordingly.
Comeys explanation regarding his decision not to publicly announce that Trump wasnt personally under investigation makes sense to me. The investigation was (and is) still underway and Trump wasn't a person of interest but until the investigation was closed, that could have changed creating a duty to correct. I imagine a federal employee requires more than Trumps fragile self image for a reason to anonymously disclose information about ongoing FBI investigations. Your analogy about the police doesn't work for me. If I was head of a company where many were under investigation for criminal activity and my name wasn't one of them, that's good enough for me. I'd be happy to say "Lets give the police our full support to complete their investigation" and leave it at that. I dont need the police to go making public statements about me personally. I can do that myself.
Yes Im biased against Trump but that doesnt mean my arguments are not valid. FWIW the whole reason Im engaging with you is to seek an alternative view to counter my very obvious biases.
However I will just point out that a common theme I see when engaging with Trump fans is that they rarely leap to the defence of his character. That speaks volumes to me.
@Catogrande said in Awesome stuff you see on the internet:
@antipodean said in Awesome stuff you see on the internet:
@canefan said in Awesome stuff you see on the internet:
Paige Spiriac
How can she swing properly with those whapping melons?
Its all in the hips, Its all in the hips
@dogmeat said in US Election Thread 2016:
@Frank Given the alternative - you betcha
Neither candidate is attractive but one comes across as a crooked politician (so pretty much par for the course) and the other a morally corrupt, self-aggrandizing, narcissistic, bullying, lazy, ill-informed, pretty stupid, dangerously moody, sociopath
You left out petty, thin skinned and small handed
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@phoenetia said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@phoenetia said in US Politics:
I find no reason to disbelieve what Comey has testified so far and it should worry Trump fans that the Senate Intelligence Committee is treating his testimony as credible. Comey would have approached Trump knowing exactly what to expect. He's a lawyer and ex head of the FBI after all - he's no idiot. Accusations of partisanship seem weak when we know he was a registered republican right up until 2016 and that he has royally pissed off both sides of the political establishment.
Everything Comey has testified so far seems in line with what I would expect from Trump. If I'm to believe Comey is fibbing, I'd have expected him to use stronger language other than "I'm hoping" - as I said earlier, the case for obstruction is weak and it makes no sense that a seasoned attorney would fabricate a weak case that on its own is unlikely to go anywhere. That Trump emptied the room is a dead give away that he knew what he was doing was not kosher. If you think Comey would leak a baseless case for Obstruction and thats his end game, I would argue that you have grossly under-estimated the former FBI director.As for the charge of perjury - well, that obviously hinges on Trump testifying against Comey which he has (astoundingly) offered to do. Of course, I don't believe anything that Trump has said so far. He has the least credibility of any President in modern history and has a decades old public profile as a as a chronic bullshitter. He has trouble sticking to message without the aid of a teleprompter. Comey knew before he leaked his notes that the logical conclusion from that action is Trump testifying.
FWIW, when I worked in finance, I recorded meetings on my phone quite regularly because some of the people I worked with were ethically questionable. It would not surprise me if Comey acted likewise whilst working under Trump.
Source for where the committee sees Comey as credible and actually believe him??? Remember the committee is more than just Democrats.
Comey by his actions as outlined previously has shown himself to be corruptible and dishonest. I don't believe much of anything he says. He folded for Lynch in the most pathetic way. About the only thing not released or leaked from the FBI over the last few months was the fact that Trump was not under investigation. Comeys reasoning.... he might be at some stage. That is monumentally pathetic excuse. It is like the police refusing to say that soemone is not under investigation for child molesting.. because one day they might be. FFS
As fr the rest of your post, it just comes down you not liking Trump and fitting the narrative to that. I dont know who is telling the truth, but I know that Comey is far FAR from credible.If he is so competent, why would he allow Lynch to tell him to refer to it as a 'matter' not an investigation? Why would he not record or note about meetings with her after that? He said he was concerned... yeah right.
And that doesnt even mention his complete and utter over reach on the Clinton result.
The Committee did next to nothing to attack the credibility of Comeys testimony. They essentially just let it speak for itself. It was quite striking, I had expected otherwise.
You've argued that Comey is not credible for a number of reasons yet the Committee has not argued accordingly.Comeys explanation regarding his decision not to publicly announce that Trump wasnt personally under investigation makes sense to me. The investigation was (and is) still underway and Trump wasn't a person of interest but until the investigation was closed, that could have changed creating a duty to correct. I imagine a federal employee requires more than Trumps fragile self image for a reason to anonymously disclose information about ongoing FBI investigations. Your analogy about the police doesn't work for me. If I was head of a company where many were under investigation for criminal activity and my name wasn't one of them, that's good enough for me. I'd be happy to say "Lets give the police our full support to complete their investigation" and leave it at that. I dont need the police to go making public statements about me personally. I can do that myself.
Yes Im biased against Trump but that doesnt mean my arguments are not valid. FWIW the whole reason Im engaging with you is to seek an alternative view to counter my very obvious biases.
However I will just point out that a common theme I see when engaging with Trump fans is that they rarely leap to the defence of his character. That speaks volumes to me.The intel committee did attack Comey! Thy cant exactly jump the desk and punch him. Did you see Rubios questions and comments among others?
It is not the committees job to attack his credibility in that setting. They are there to ask questions and lead people to their own conclusions on his credibility. They did alot to question his position, actions and his performance. See the comment about the only ting not leaked from the FBI was the one thing that cleared Trump. Not exactly a gentle punch form Rubio.As for not clearing Trump, all well and good, except Comey has a very active history of discussing active investigations. Remember him saying Clinton was no longer the subject of an investigation? Before the investigation has concluded and despite the fact she and the Clinton foundation are still actually under investigation? He cannot just pick and chose when to do his job correctly. Or maybe he could and that was why he was a crap FBI director.. and not credible.
As for leaping to defence of his character? Why would I do that? I dont know him.. and he is a politician. I am interested in the facts of the matter, not if he is a nice guy. Maybe the volumes it speaks to you is that people defending Trump are doing so because they look at the facts, and those that are attacking him are doing it because he is they dont think he is very nice.
Im not sure how you got to physical assault from "attack his credibility" but whatever. Rubios questioning was adequate at best but not what I would consider effective.
The FBI concluded its investigation into Clintons emails on July 05. It wasn't an active investigation when Comey decided to send his letter to the members of congress.
FWIW, one need not personally know someone to make a judgement on their character as you demonstrated on your comments about Comey ("has shown himself to be corruptible and dishonest"). It seems odd that you are unable to make a similar character judgement on (arguably) the most talked about man in the world but whatever, you aren't required to defend Trumps character. I was just pointing out that very few Trump fans ever do.
http://www.theshovel.com.au/2017/07/19/greens-senators-to-come-with-country-of-origin-labelling/
"The Greens – who have been strong supporters of country of origin labelling for years – will finally get their wish, with mandatory Country of Origin information identified in large print on all current and future senators."
@Siam Since 2004 apparently. Daimen spotted me watching rugby highlights when we worked together briefly in London and told me to check it out.
@gt12 said in US Election Thread 2016:
Talking of schadenfreude, I have to admit I enjoyed this showing up in my news feed.
Voter fraud in Iowa!
and, she's a Trump supporter
From Des Moines Register:
Voter fraud suspect arrested in Des Moines
A Des Moines woman has been arrested on suspicion of voting twice this month in the general election, police and court records show.
I read she voted twice because she was concerned her first vote was going to be changed to Clinton. Gee, I wonder how she got that fking stupid idea in her head.
Get Out - Black American guy meets the White girlfriends parents for the first time. They're a bit odd and awkward... even the black homoe hellp / folk that keep company with them are a bit off. A funny thriller / horror, it reminded me of a movie from almost 20 years ago which I won't mention for fear of spoiling the plot.
3.5 TSA Agents out 5.
@Frank said in US Politics:
I wonder if Comey (and others) will in trouble .......
I assume you are referring to this :
So the “leak” to the New York Times, to write the Thursday May 11th story about the dinner in question happened at least four days prior to James Comey stating he intentionally gave memos to his friend Daniel Richman after waking up on Monday night May 15th.
That’s lie #1.
Thats already been debunked.
But Kasowitz made a significant error in describing the sequence of events prior to the memo’s disclosure. He claims the public record “reveals that The New York Times was quoting from these memos the day before the referenced tweet, which belies Mr. Comey’s excuse for this unauthorized disclosure of privileged information and appears to be entirely retaliatory.” In fact, Trump posted his tweet about “tapes” of their conversations on May 12. The first Times article about the memos wasn’t published until four days later on May 16. While the Times did publish an article on May 11 describing the January 27 dinner in which Trump purportedly asked Comey for his loyalty, the Times cited officials who recalled Comey’s descriptions of the evening to them, not the memos themselves.
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Politics:
As for leaping to defence of his character? Why would I do that? I dont know him.. and he is a politician. I am interested in the facts of the matter, not if he is a nice guy. Maybe the volumes it speaks to you is that people defending Trump are doing so because they look at the facts, and those that are attacking him are doing it because he is they dont think he is very nice.
I don't give a rats if Trump is 'nice' or not.
I do care that he is a proven self centered and thin skinned reactionary egotist who makes knee jerk decisions.
If I was an american tax payer I would also be concerned that he is spending millions of taxpayer dollars at his own businesses.Proven self centered? Jeez he must be first president to have that trait. .oh wait they ALL do. Thin skinned... I think he has been incredibly restrained after the disgusting and dishonest attacks he has been subjected to. Maybe if the media and left stopped being complete and utter piston wristed gibbons. Things would improve. But they won't.. because Trump is a republican president.Bush got similar treatment... if a lesser version.
The lesson appears to be that if you are a republican president you have to put up with lies and twuntish behaviour from media etc. If you fight back you are thin skinned. Wouldnt be so bad if Democrat presidents had the same volume of shit to deal with.
As for the business side...
People could care about that.. i think it rubbish beltway nonsense. Time..... and the court case will tell. Until then I will just think it is yet another part attack from the left.But I am pleased the left is finally showing some interest in cash corrupion in politics... let's talk about the Clinton Foundation. The one under actual FBI investigation
It should come as no surprise that he who has a history as a twunt, and continues to act as a twunt gets treated like twunt.
Theres really no need for any media outlet to make up damaging lies about Trump - Trump gives them so much ammunition that it really isn't necessary.
To his adversaries, sacking Comey made Trump look like he was hiding something.
Telling Lester Holt that it was because of the "Russia thing" reaffirmed their suspicions and made the job of his administration much harder.
Everyone had all but forgotten about the "scandalous dossier", now we're talking about it again and not only that, we now know that the FBI are still actively investigating it.
Like many headlines during Trumps presidency, this is largely a mess of Trump's own making but you'll never hear him say it.
Fking in toilets aint my scene. Too much shit and piss for my liking but what ever floats your boat.
@MiketheSnow Thanks for the recommendation, checking it out now
Congrats to the Irish by the way - so happy for you guys, long overdue and well deserved win. Enjoy the festivities!
Wow! I wonder just how far they'll look to improve capacity and cost... as it stands, these new powerwalls will make the ROI challenge disappear for many folk. If they can double the capacity again within the next five years, it could resolve the ROI challenge completely.
We're looking at a knock down rebuild over the next 3 years, my wife is drooling at the thought of installing a Tesla Solar Roof, she's been harping on about the need for a product like this for years.
@Baron-Silas-Greenback said in US Election Thread 2016:
@phoenetia
He didnt call anyone weak. That is the fact. care to counter that? That should have been your first step before saying it was not dishonest.
As soon as you point out where he called anyone weak..... then you have a starting point, until then you talking shite.
But to help you I will give you a clue. Your logic is flawed in your first post and indeed what you said was logical.. actually was not.He said
"and combat and they see things that maybe a lot of folks in this room have seen many times over and you’re strong and you can handle it but a lot of people can’t handle it. "Factual flaw 1 .. not being strong does not make you weak, it is not binary.
Factual flaw 2 ... given his statement it is also a true statement that it is possible to be strong and still not handle it. .. the clue is the 'and'. From a logical perspective he may have said "you’re tall and you can handle it but a lot of people can’t handle it' . Now at this point you need to remember that you 'bought 'logic' into the equation, even if incredibly poorly... there is nothing logical about your assumption.. and your willingness to lap up everything the media throws at you that suits your dislike of Trump, at least try to show some independent thinking. And don't throw around the phrase 'logically' you clearly don't understand it.
Good grief. Didnt I already say he didn't explicitly call anyone weak? How many more times do you need me to say it?