Freedom of speech

"Why Impeachment?

The nation is now witnessing a massive corruption of the presidency, far worse than Watergate. Indeed, Nixon White House Counsel John Dean has told reporters: “I don’t think Richard Nixon even comes close to the level of corruption we already know about Trump.”[1] Given the opportunity of ten full weeks between the election and the inauguration to divest his business interests, Mr. Trump chose instead to announce, just nine days before inauguration, a wholly inadequate plan to step away from operations, but not ownership or income streams, of the Trump Organization. Instead, he has chosen to profit from the presidency at public expense, in violation of the United States Constitution. The violations, the corruption, and the threat to our republic are here now."

It's slightly worse than May trying to fiddle the council repayments in Surrey, telling them they can keep the business taxes they collect.
She said with typical British understatement.

Only three Presidents have ever been threatened with impeachment. President Andrew Jackson (acquitted) and more recently President Clinton, husband of Hillary, (also rather surprisingly acquitted!!) President Nixon resigned before he could be impeached. A lot of Americans love D.Trump, and I think he'd have to do a lot more to even risk impeachment!

Notanan, sorry to have to break it to you but the meaning of freedom of speech is not defined by you, or by me, but ultimately in law.

I am not free to say whatever I like, I could be prosecuted under the law and so could you.

You have simply listed a load of 'compared to' examples of punishments as experienced in other countries around the world. These lists perhaps have salience for you.

But in doing so you are still esentially talking about degrees of freedom (of speech). which for me, as a Brit, is a non-sense, contradiction in terms. One is either free or one isn't.

Aren't you lot a bit tired of Trump? I just turn the channel, skip the newspaper article, turn the radio down during the news when I hear his name now as it just becomes the same old same-old.

Life is much sweeter now... I was seriously overdosing on all the hype and it was affecting my mood on a daily basis.

The final straw was his indignation at stores dropping his daughter's clothing line. Who cares, the average person could not afford her clothes. And they are not made in the US, they are made in China and Hong Kong,so perhaps in a perverse way the stores are honouring tRump's edict to buy American and she will be slapped with a tariff!

uk.businessinsider.com/ivanka-trump-clothing-line-made-in-china-hong-kong-2017-2

Bleagh...

It really doesn't matter how many people want him to be impeached djen 10 or 10 million, as it's not the wanting that counts to impeach a US President.
Presumably they are Democrat voters on a Democrat site?
He may do something further along the line to warrant it ( or not) but can't see it happening yet.

impeachdonaldtrumpnow.org/

Wow. Another week and there will be more people wanting to impeach him than wanting to stop him coming to UK.
Over three quarters of a million.

I notice Sean Spicer is sticking up for Trump on the news, even though Trump wants to sack him already. So much for free speech in the USA.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mother-mia-aycliffe-chung-backpacker-killed-donald-trump-terror-attack-australia-hotel-queensland-a7568371.html

A Trump lie, just for you, Ankers, as you asked.
The mother is rightly very upset, as the man who killed her daughter is not an Islamic fundamentalist, and has never set foot in a mosque.

So sorry, I didn't think you were suggesting it was Fitzy, just posted a comment on the use of racist slurs in general, when they are used in the home they go down another generation , suppose they will always be with us

Annie, I agree. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.

I think it sad that in 2017 racist slurs are acceptable if not said publicly

People who work in public places need to avoid offensive language. As Annie says we dont actually know what this man said. Seems to me that on that basis we are jumping the gun in deciding what action was appropriate, whether that's to defend him or report to the police. It might well be that a warning would have been sufficient. Annie asked whether someone who steals for the first time should be let off. I think a warning often is the response to a first offence of theft, depending on the circumstances.

You Mair have never been on the receiving end of racist comments ? I have and they hurt . Why use racist slurs to critcise anyone . So not vindictive, just my sympathy is with victims of racist slurs not those who dish them out. You have no idea what this man said yet defend him , your choice , your opinion

I think it should have been reported to the police , my opinion

Vindictive. Even the snitch who told his employer didnt go that far!

He cannot be treated as a criminal because he was not found guilty in a court of law, as you say - he was protected from any prosecution, I think it should have been reported to the police , my opinion .

Hmm, private conversation in a public place...

"for fruitier language you mean racist language yes? I doubt the fruitier language was a few swear words"

Ive no idea. For many of the Newspeak Stasi to apply swear words to the migranst would be deemed 'racist' if he had said something such as 'f**** lying c****'.

However the point was it was a private conversation, which happened to be overheard,he wasnt directing abuse at anyone, or preaching from a soapbox. Whatever he said should not be treated as criminal, and presumably he would have got off in a High Court (though maybe not in a magistrates). His employer was not to blame, they protected him really.

AB
Comparing to theft is spurious because theft is not subjective and the person is innocent until proven guilty, while alleged 'racism' is entirely subjective and everyone sets the bar in a different place. Its down to the whim of the magistrate. For some even opposing immigration is 'racist'!

Sorry I forgot to add, if a person steals should they be let off because it was the first time?

A conversation between friends heard by a family and other witnesses, for fruitier language you mean racist language yes? I doubt the fruitier language was a few swear words.

Why would anyone have the need to use racist comments

I do not know his precise words AB. It was discussed on the radio and I only heard what he said as reported speech.

He was overheard discussing a newspaper article which compared Jewish children arriving under the kindertransport and those, allegedly 'children', coming from Calais He said they were not comparable with the six-year-old Jewish children arriving on Kindertransport trains fleeing the Nazis. I suspect his actual wording was rather 'fruitier' given that its reported h has since said the heritage centre can 'b*** off' , but the point was this was still just a conversation between friends which happened to be overheard. He should have been warned to mind his language but not banned the first occasion this happened.

Mair, you have the advantage, you know what he said, I do not, perhaps you would repeat what he said, naturally omitting anything which is against the law, you can use asterisks yes?

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

You have the added issue of what are called 'Clickbait Websites'.

These are web sites that mix some bits of a true story but insinuate and 'make up' other details to sew fear, purpose of propaganda, political spin etc.

They are usually conspiratorial in nature.

Then you have the concern of trolling.

' Someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

We have to be very careful who/what we link to and be careful not to be so gullable into assuming 'ANY' poster has not directed us to a Fake News site, or repeated Fake News as has happened on GN.

For the purpose of openness I am going onto the Site Forum to engage GNHQ with this issue.

Sorry, Mair

I do wish we had an ignore button

We have, it's called Willpower!

Make, what a very sad story. The conversation that is reported to have taken place does not seem to be racist to me, apparently he was comparing the two situations. Are people no longer allowed to question, compare, and discuss events without being labelled racist?
Roses, you are correct, there are two ways to view what the speaker said/did, you either agree with it or you don't.