SuburbanFarmer wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:51 am
I didn’t realize that Islamic states were in the heinous business of denying protest permits. Crimes against humanity, indeed.
But you cry like a bitch when we dont answer a question from CNN. Dance on broken glass.
Yeah, I think it would be a good idea for POTUS not to openly discriminate among news networks, but what do I know.
BjornP wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:43 am
"Which answers to a large extent to..."? That "large extent" being what, then? Among democracies isn't it only the US which allow its police forces to be directly controlled by politicians?
Wait what? How can you be a democracy if an elected official doesn't have some sort of control over police?
SuburbanFarmer wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 5:51 am
I didn’t realize that Islamic states were in the heinous business of denying protest permits. Crimes against humanity, indeed.
But you cry like a bitch when we dont answer a question from CNN. Dance on broken glass.
Yeah, I think it would be a good idea for POTUS not to openly discriminate among news networks, but what do I know.
Drink a cold cup of bleach.
But the "last great statesman" could not shut up about Fox news and you said exactly what you know about, nothing, just like the hack bitch you are.
I would tell you to step on a rake but you do that all on your own.
BjornP wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:43 am
"Which answers to a large extent to..."? That "large extent" being what, then? Among democracies isn't it only the US which allow its police forces to be directly controlled by politicians?
Wait what? How can you be a democracy if an elected official doesn't have some sort of control over police?
You almost have the Euros about to take that moment of self-reflection here.
BjornP wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:43 am
"Which answers to a large extent to..."? That "large extent" being what, then? Among democracies isn't it only the US which allow its police forces to be directly controlled by politicians?
Wait what? How can you be a democracy if an elected official doesn't have some sort of control over police?
By adhering to a Western principle known as "separation of powers".
BjornP wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:43 am
"Which answers to a large extent to..."? That "large extent" being what, then? Among democracies isn't it only the US which allow its police forces to be directly controlled by politicians?
Wait what? How can you be a democracy if an elected official doesn't have some sort of control over police?
By adhering to a Western principle known as "separation of powers".
What separate power controls your police that you have no control over?
BjornP wrote: Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:43 am
"Which answers to a large extent to..."? That "large extent" being what, then? Among democracies isn't it only the US which allow its police forces to be directly controlled by politicians?
Wait what? How can you be a democracy if an elected official doesn't have some sort of control over police?
By adhering to a Western principle known as "separation of powers".
Governance
Since January 2012, the Mayor of London is responsible for the governance of the Metropolitan Police through the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC). The mayor is able to appoint someone to act on his behalf; the current office-holder is Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Sophie Linden. The work of MOPAC is scrutinised by the Police and Crime Committee (also known as a police and crime panel) of the London Assembly. These structures were created by the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 and replaced the Metropolitan Police Authority appointed board created in 2000 by Greater London Authority Act 1999.
That is from the wiki. What the hell are you talking about?
Wait what? How can you be a democracy if an elected official doesn't have some sort of control over police?
By adhering to a Western principle known as "separation of powers".
Ah what? So you elect policemen directly?
No. We just don't give mayors or any elected that much direct power over police. The top police chief of the country answers to the Danish justice departement.
But you cry like a bitch when we dont answer a question from CNN. Dance on broken glass.
Yeah, I think it would be a good idea for POTUS not to openly discriminate among news networks, but what do I know.
Drink a cold cup of bleach.
But the "last great statesman" could not shut up about Fox news and you said exactly what you know about, nothing, just like the hack bitch you are.
I would tell you to step on a rake but you do that all on your own.
Leave CNN alone.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
