Started By
Message

re: Is Trump exaggerating about the US intelligence regarding the UK base "bombers?"

Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:36 pm to
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
93144 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:36 pm to
Naw man like other threads IvoryFacade is confident.
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
61031 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:37 pm to
quote:

Trump's failure to follow the law


oh Hank.
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:41 pm to
quote:

Wait, you are the one that said that the UK police did a good job?

So what is it?


You understand there's a difference between the local police and British intelligence, right?

Here there's no evidence that British intelligence was responsible for the initial contact. The arrest was ordinary, local police work. The INVESTIGATION is being handled by national police NOW. There's no indication that the 5 were on the radar of ANY intelligence agency (American or British) BEFORE the local police responded to the tip and made the arrest.

quote:

A member of the public called police at about 12:45 a.m. Sunday, September 27, reporting three suspicious vehicles apparently heading toward RAF Fairford.

Armed officers responded and arrested the five men in Whelford, the nearby village.

Gloucestershire Police initially handled the incident locally.

The investigation was then taken over/led by Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP), the UK's national counterterrorism policing network.
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:42 pm to
quote:

oh Hank.


Simple question: did Trump follow the law in basing the tariffs on IEEPA?

C'mon. I KNOW there's a shred of honesty left in you.
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
93144 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:44 pm to
Broken fricking record every thread it's comical.
Posted by djsdawg
Member since Apr 2015
42386 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:45 pm to
quote:

Seems like if we had actual intelligence on these 5 we would have shared that with the UK so that: - the "bombers" would have been arrested earlier - they wouldn't have been released on bond


Seems like this to an idiot
Posted by LaMigra
Member since Nov 2022
2818 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 3:55 pm to
quote:

quote:He's trying to take credit for the UK's good police work. Are you fricking stupid?


Do you have to ask
Posted by bbvdd
Memphis, TN
Member since Jun 2009
29120 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:03 pm to
quote:

There's no indication that the 5 were on the radar of ANY intelligence agency (American or British) BEFORE the local police responded to the tip and made the arrest.


You know this because this type of info is readily available??
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
93144 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:04 pm to
Ivory is confident!

And drops back to his tried and true

Why hasn't the data been released instantly!

Posted by beerJeep
Louisiana
Member since Nov 2016
39348 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:08 pm to
There’s a better chance of finding a live ivory billed woodpecker than for ivorybillmatt to be correct.
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:08 pm to
quote:

Yes he is exaggerating. He always does. He can not tell the truth. I voted him every time he was on the ballot


Amen! Why is this so hard for fellow Trump voters to accept?

It's engrained in his master salesman personality. Overall, Trump's complete personality has many more positives than negatives as far as being the person America needed as president during these times.

I'm guilty of pointing this out too often and forcefully here. At this point, people either see the lying or they don't. It's STILL amazing to me. I will try to tone it down.
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:12 pm to
quote:

There’s a better chance of finding a live ivory billed woodpecker than for ivorybillmatt to be correct.


Well both of those are 100% certitudes, but I will bite...other than predicting Perez (illegal alien shot in the back by ICE in Austin) would be swiftly deported...about what have I been incorrect?
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
61031 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:12 pm to
quote:

Simple question: did Trump follow the law in basing the tariffs on IEEPA? C'mon. I KNOW there's a shred of honesty left in you.


The court said no. Is that the hill you will die on? Trump doesn’t follow the law because after 6 years you can talk about Tariffs. Oh…and even you know he can levy tarrifs…the court just said he can’t rely on IEEPA. If that’s your big gotcha…that’s just sad. Hank.

Do you think Clarence Thomas is a competent jurist?
This post was edited on 9/28/26 at 4:14 pm
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:17 pm to
quote:

You know this because this type of info is readily available??


I know this because they were arrested only because of a tip to local police by a local farmer.

I also know it because, for better or worse, this Administration is so heavily into messaging. If they had anything to support the President's claims they would have produced it.

Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 4:25 pm to
quote:

The court said no. Is that the hill you will die on? Trump doesn’t follow the law because after 6 years you can talk about Tariffs. Oh…and even you know he can levy tarrifs…the court just said he can’t rely on IEEPA. If that’s your big gotcha…that’s just sad. Hank.

Do you think Clarence Thomas is a competent jurist?


Of course, that's not my only example, it's just such an obvious example. The President had many more options other than IEEPA that WOULD have worked.

The President COULD have appointed someone other than Halligan who would have met the statutory requirements to be USA for EDVA. He got bad legal advice.

Quit being such a contrarian dick. The Administration pushes the boundaries of the law to stretch them in favor of a more powerful President. Sometimes they cross legal boundaries. You know this.
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 5:14 pm to
quote:

You are a naive pussy who doesn’t understand humanity


Pop quiz: was North Vietnam actually a threat to the United States? They prevailed in the Indochina War. North Vietnam is a close trading partner with the United States. How was North Vietnam actually threat to the US?

Tell me how I am the naive pussy? It seems that you are. In matters of war and profit, our government tends to lie to us.

Do you think the Spanish actually blew up the USS Maine?

Was the war in Iraq a good investment in blood and treasure? Trump thought we were lied to about that. Is he a naive pussy?


Posted by TenWheelsForJesus
Member since Jan 2018
12059 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 5:14 pm to
quote:

Is the President fricking stupid? HE'S the one who said that the US had these men under investigation. He also said that "WE know all about them, and you will hear about it very soon...WE caught them."


And instead of waiting for "very soon," you are here trying to convince everyone the US had nothing to do with it despite the limited information as if you have an emotional attachment to disproving Trump.

Your primary interest in the story is to prove Trump wrong, not seek the truth.
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
90265 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 5:16 pm to
quote:

Your primary interest in the story is to prove Trump wrong, not seek the truth.


He’ll protest otherwise because he really thinks nobody notices, but that’s just about every thread he starts.
Posted by IvoryBillMatt
Member since Mar 2020
12000 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 5:55 pm to
quote:

Your primary interest in the story is to prove Trump wrong, not seek the truth.


It's just the obviousness of the pattern...and the absurdity of the statement. Trump makes up something off the top of his head ("We're charging a 20% fee for all cargo passing through the Strait of Hormuz!"), and then that statement gets officially ignored or quietly walked back.

In this case, Trump's first comment was an off the cuff statement in answer to a reporter's question. Clearly, no one briefed him on how to handle the obvious question.

The video is short. Listen to it. It's really entertaining to watch him make it up on the spot...to sound like this was some great victory for American intelligence.

quote:

Working with the British was great. It may have been Scotland Yard. I don't know. We work with a lot of them. We had them under view for a long time and we got them."


You left it up to a middle-aged female farmer to report them to the local Gloucestershire police so that the local police could make the arrest of these hardened terrorists who were out to do "great damage to our fort?" AND Scotland Yard, or whoever we're working with, didn't charge the hardened terrorists with any crimes...AND released them from custody?

Y'all really believe what the President said about these guys and our supposed long-term investigation of them?

I will stop now, and wait for Trump to give the details to back up his assertion like he promised. I expect we will see those details

-just after the double tap video of the killing of the boat survivors (as Trump promised, but didn't deliver),
-but before the Pentagon's report on the Minab Girls School bombing (which the Pentagon has promised, but not delivered).

I know we're the good guys. It's the lack of transparency that leads to any thought that the powers that be don't think we're the good guys...or that facts are just invented to fit a narrative.

This post was edited on 9/28/26 at 6:06 pm
Posted by Hateradedrink
Member since May 2023
4335 posts
Posted on 9/28/26 at 5:56 pm to
quote:

Is Trump exaggerating


The answer is yes; didnt read anything further
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

Facebook•X•Instagram