|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 23, 2024 19:30:53 GMT
Semantics chief. He denied the legitimacy of his presidency over all the knicker wringing the Democrats were doing over Trumps Russia collusion and Pee tapes 😆 They are all as bad as each other all said and done.. Of course it's semantics. Semantics is concerned with the meaning of words. If words aren't given exact meaning anything anyone says is just noise. You are spot on in that my post is semantically correct. Your posts on this matter are semantically incorrect. I'm using words accurately to describe where Trump is at. You are using words in a way that is semantically inaccurate in order to describe Trump in a way that is fundamentally incorrect. Or to put it another way - you are bullshiting. What an arrogant position to take. And insults not required. I'm not wrong at all. I'm talking about 2 political parties who both engage in the same bollox as each other, 100% fact. I've agreed with you Trump is a unique wanker whose gone way further than anyone else. The fact you've been sucked in with the media obsession with Trump to the point you can't see how your Democrat politicians deny elections just like republicans do then thats on you. Jeez Democrats have even resorted to removing people from ballots. Proud of that one? Open your eyes.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 24, 2024 16:24:36 GMT
If it's really all about NATO funding, then don't the numbers matter? I know I think weirdly - it's not normal to go look this stuff up. But I think it's important that if the issue is "spending enough" then you need to look at the context and the numbers and not just believe what a politician says. Nothing wrong with looking things up. And I 100% agree with you. We should not trust what politicians say without looking into it a bit further👍 It's someothing I've checked every so often. NATO agreed the 2% target in 2014 and European spending rose every year since then (although not always as fast as GDP, it should have grown faster). Europe as a whole hit 2% this year. Only 9 met the target last year, but more will this year. Every country with a border to Russia, Ukraine or Belarus is beating the 2% already. I think it's obvious why Trump started coming up with excuses to abandon NATO - he fucking despises democracy and freedom, he loves dictators, and he wants to blackmail or abandon us. There was absolutely no reason to start tearing down NATO security guarantees, except as part of a malicious plan to set the propaganda space for him to fuck us later.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 24, 2024 16:29:55 GMT
Of course it's semantics. Semantics is concerned with the meaning of words. If words aren't given exact meaning anything anyone says is just noise. You are spot on in that my post is semantically correct. Your posts on this matter are semantically incorrect. I'm using words accurately to describe where Trump is at. You are using words in a way that is semantically inaccurate in order to describe Trump in a way that is fundamentally incorrect. Or to put it another way - you are bullshiting. What an arrogant position to take. And insults not required. I'm not wrong at all. I'm talking about 2 political parties who both engage in the same bollox as each other, 100% fact. I've agreed with you Trump is a unique wanker whose gone way further than anyone else. The fact you've been sucked in with the media obsession with Trump to the point you can't see how your Democrat politicians deny elections just like republicans do then thats on you. Jeez Democrats have even resorted to removing people from ballots. Proud of that one? Open your eyes. I can find Hillary Clinton's speech where she conceded the 2016 election, can you find Trump's speech where he conceded the 2020 election? Accepting the legitimacy of the vote and ensuring the peaceful transfer of power is one of the foudations of democracy.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 24, 2024 16:57:05 GMT
Another case where elections matter: I like a thing called "net neutrality", it says that your internet company can't control what you look up, they can't block or slow down traffic unless it's illegal (kiddie porn etc).
Internet companies hate net neutrality because a lot of time they want you to buy their shitty overpriced video service instead of using Netflix or whatever. Without net neutrality they can slow down Netflix to ruin it, hoping you pay them for their piece of shit instead. They could also take money from Walmart to slow down or block websites of smaller shops, or censor your internet to help their politics.
Late last year, Biden's Democrats beat Trump's Republicans 3-2 in a committee vote to restore net neutrality.
Biden+Democrats support a free and open internet. Trump's Republicans support control by a few megacorporations.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 24, 2024 16:59:26 GMT
What an arrogant position to take. And insults not required. I'm not wrong at all. I'm talking about 2 political parties who both engage in the same bollox as each other, 100% fact. I've agreed with you Trump is a unique wanker whose gone way further than anyone else. The fact you've been sucked in with the media obsession with Trump to the point you can't see how your Democrat politicians deny elections just like republicans do then thats on you. Jeez Democrats have even resorted to removing people from ballots. Proud of that one? Open your eyes. I can find Hillary Clinton's speech where she conceded the 2016 election, can you find Trump's speech where he conceded the 2020 election? Accepting the legitimacy of the vote and ensuring the peaceful transfer of power is one of the foudations of democracy. I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Mar 25, 2024 9:37:07 GMT
This made me chuckle. Had to go and check it was a verified account as its just so random
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 25, 2024 9:51:30 GMT
This made me chuckle. Had to go and check it was a verified account as its just so random Oh that's brutal. 😆
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 25, 2024 10:10:01 GMT
I can find Hillary Clinton's speech where she conceded the 2016 election, can you find Trump's speech where he conceded the 2020 election? Accepting the legitimacy of the vote and ensuring the peaceful transfer of power is one of the foudations of democracy. I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣 Ahhh...you falsify the value of property for a living. So when you say the Democrats are just as bad as Trump what you are really saying Trump isn't that bad in order to downplay and justify your own wrong doing. Condemning Trump's business practices has nothing to do with sympathising with banks and everything to do with no-one being above the law. Trumps entire defence of is based on him being Donald Trump and therefore the rules don't apply to him. That isn't how the law should work. Even people who systematically break the law should at least have the decency to take it in the chin when they get found out. I don't particularly want you to get caught but if you do I'd hope you'd at least have the good grace to accept your punishment if you are found to have broken the law. I'm afraid the "everyone is doing it" defence isn't going to hold up in court
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Mar 25, 2024 11:04:15 GMT
I can find Hillary Clinton's speech where she conceded the 2016 election, can you find Trump's speech where he conceded the 2020 election? Accepting the legitimacy of the vote and ensuring the peaceful transfer of power is one of the foudations of democracy. I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣 That handling of the southern border included a bill that passed the Senate to increase powers to clamp down on immigration. Trump had Johnson kill it in the House because he couldn’t have Biden be seen to be doing anything about immigration. Republicans - tough on immigration, unless it doesn’t suit them.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 25, 2024 13:07:55 GMT
I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣 Ahhh...you falsify the value of property for a living. So when you say the Democrats are just as bad as Trump what you are really saying Trump isn't that bad in order to downplay and justify your own wrong doing. Condemning Trump's business practices has nothing to do with sympathising with banks and everything to do with no-one being above the law. Trumps entire defence of is based on him being Donald Trump and therefore the rules don't apply to him. That isn't how the law should work. Even people who systematically break the law should at least have the decency to take it in the chin when they get found out. I don't particularly want you to get caught but if you do I'd hope you'd at least have the good grace to accept your punishment if you are found to have broken the law. I'm afraid the "everyone is doing it" defence isn't going to hold up in court I've nothing to get caught for so you don't need to worry about me. As far as I'm aware this case wasn't even brought forward by the banks. They even testified I believe to say they didn't rely on Trumps assessments as they did their own valuations and diligence. They also testified they got paid back in full. So it gets me wondering why is this the big issue it is? I'm sure the banks are grateful for the outpouring of sympathy but in reality it appears they don't really give a shit. Lets face it they didn't give a shit about you me or anybody else but themselves back in 2008. Remember that. Is it the same type of political shenanigans that Civilstokie is referring to above regarding trump getting republicans to oppose Democrat attempts to introduce better border policies.... Is America becoming more and more like Russia every day. Political opponents being pursued in the courts. Is it all distraction. Something isn't right thats for sure. Just my opinion of course....
|
|
|
Post by georgeberrysafro on Mar 25, 2024 15:05:53 GMT
Ahhh...you falsify the value of property for a living. So when you say the Democrats are just as bad as Trump what you are really saying Trump isn't that bad in order to downplay and justify your own wrong doing. Condemning Trump's business practices has nothing to do with sympathising with banks and everything to do with no-one being above the law. Trumps entire defence of is based on him being Donald Trump and therefore the rules don't apply to him. That isn't how the law should work. Even people who systematically break the law should at least have the decency to take it in the chin when they get found out. I don't particularly want you to get caught but if you do I'd hope you'd at least have the good grace to accept your punishment if you are found to have broken the law. I'm afraid the "everyone is doing it" defence isn't going to hold up in court I've nothing to get caught for so you don't need to worry about me. As far as I'm aware this case wasn't even brought forward by the banks. They even testified I believe to say they didn't rely on Trumps assessments as they did their own valuations and diligence. They also testified they got paid back in full. So it gets me wondering why is this the big issue it is? I'm sure the banks are grateful for the outpouring of sympathy but in reality it appears they don't really give a shit. Lets face it they didn't give a shit about you me or anybody else but themselves back in 2008. Remember that. Is it the same type of political shenanigans that Civilstokie is referring to above regarding trump getting republicans to oppose Democrat attempts to introduce better border policies.... Is America becoming more and more like Russia every day. Political opponents being pursued in the courts. Is it all distraction. Something isn't right thats for sure. Just my opinion of course.... I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Surely that Border Wall that Trump got the Mexicans to pay for is doing a good job right? He managed to build just 458 miles in 4 years - and only 52 miles of that figure covered sections where there was previosuly no barrier. The number of crossings, as measured by apprehensions at the border, rose steeply during Trump's term, more than doubling from 2018 to 2019. The pandemic initially slowed migration, but by spring 2021, the number of unlawful border crossings and arrests — separate from those legally applying for asylum — had risen above the totals recorded in most months before Trump began building the wall. Then recently Senate Republicans block bipartisan border package because they didn't want Biden to have another win. Looks like poor Don Poorleone is in for a tough day today as he's already spit out his dummy overnight on honest don social.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Mar 25, 2024 16:12:10 GMT
'Don Poorleone'
Brilliant 😄👏
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 25, 2024 16:30:24 GMT
I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣 Funny thread to be on if you don't wanna debate trump mate 😉 The excuses for trump's fraud to the banks look like typical propaganda to me. If other people did it he still shouldn't be above the law. If he defrauded bad people, he still shouldn't be above the law. I also don't just believe trump's team when they say "everyone is doing it". There are massive incentives to sue for fraud as well as criminal cases like trump's, so if everyone was doing it we'd see. I just don't think we should trust politicians. They should be investigated particularly hard. Hunter Biden is going through what sounds like extreme levels of investigation that wouldn't be chased anywhere near as much if his name was Smith. But I think that's good, you should have extra scrutiny on those linked to real power IMO. Basically I think the Bidens and Trumps should get more checks than random folk, the same level as each other. But the results might be different because one of them is just more corrupt and criminal than the other. (I haven't researched the border issue enough to have a strong opinion, but I'd like to know what you think Biden's done and should do)
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 25, 2024 17:03:05 GMT
I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣 Funny thread to be on if you don't wanna debate trump mate 😉 The excuses for trump's fraud to the banks look like typical propaganda to me. If other people did it he still shouldn't be above the law. If he defrauded bad people, he still shouldn't be above the law. I also don't just believe trump's team when they say "everyone is doing it". There are massive incentives to sue for fraud as well as criminal cases like trump's, so if everyone was doing it we'd see. I just don't think we should trust politicians. They should be investigated particularly hard. Hunter Biden is going through what sounds like extreme levels of investigation that wouldn't be chased anywhere near as much if his name was Smith. But I think that's good, you should have extra scrutiny on those linked to real power IMO. Basically I think the Bidens and Trumps should get more checks than random folk, the same level as each other. But the results might be different because one of them is just more corrupt and criminal than the other. (I haven't researched the border issue enough to have a strong opinion, but I'd like to know what you think Biden's done and should do) I'm no expert on politics or the American legal system but I just find it odd that firstly the bank in question didn't bring the case. The bank under oath said it didn't rely on trumps financial assessments and did their own anyway. And the bank also testified that they have been re paid in full. I'm actually struggling to see where the big bad crime is? Regards the border all I can see is that official figures claim 7.5m illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Although that figure doesn't include an estimated further 1.5m undetected crossings. Some argue these figures are also vastly underestimated. Seems to be a very big problem to me and way way bigger than anything that happened under Trumps administration. Just saying it as I see it.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 25, 2024 17:39:20 GMT
Funny thread to be on if you don't wanna debate trump mate 😉 The excuses for trump's fraud to the banks look like typical propaganda to me. If other people did it he still shouldn't be above the law. If he defrauded bad people, he still shouldn't be above the law. I also don't just believe trump's team when they say "everyone is doing it". There are massive incentives to sue for fraud as well as criminal cases like trump's, so if everyone was doing it we'd see. I just don't think we should trust politicians. They should be investigated particularly hard. Hunter Biden is going through what sounds like extreme levels of investigation that wouldn't be chased anywhere near as much if his name was Smith. But I think that's good, you should have extra scrutiny on those linked to real power IMO. Basically I think the Bidens and Trumps should get more checks than random folk, the same level as each other. But the results might be different because one of them is just more corrupt and criminal than the other. (I haven't researched the border issue enough to have a strong opinion, but I'd like to know what you think Biden's done and should do) I'm no expert on politics or the American legal system but I just find it odd that firstly the bank in question didn't bring the case. The bank under oath said it didn't rely on trumps financial assessments and did their own anyway. And the bank also testified that they have been re paid in full. I'm actually struggling to see where the big bad crime is? Regards the border all I can see is that official figures claim 7.5m illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Although that figure doesn't include an estimated further 1.5m undetected crossings. Some argue these figures are also vastly underestimated. Seems to be a very big problem to me and way way bigger than anything that happened under Trumps administration. Just saying it as I see it. A New York Court has found Trump guilty of breaching state laws regarding accounting practices. Whether the law is good or bad is irrelevant - the role of the court is to determine whether Trump is guilty or innocent of breaking the law, not make a judgement on the law itself. Those laws apply to every company within the jurisdiction of New York state, Trump included. The fact is Trump has been found to have broken the law. Whether you think it is a bad law is completely irrelevant. The point about immigration is that Trump is getting his Republican allies to stop the Democrats from passing legislation to address the problem so that he can blame the Democrats for causing the problem and, should he get re-elected, take the credit himself. If you think this behaviour is typical of people in business and politics you are completely lacking any sense of perspective. Trump's behaviour is way out there.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 25, 2024 17:52:24 GMT
I'm no expert on politics or the American legal system but I just find it odd that firstly the bank in question didn't bring the case. The bank under oath said it didn't rely on trumps financial assessments and did their own anyway. And the bank also testified that they have been re paid in full. I'm actually struggling to see where the big bad crime is? Regards the border all I can see is that official figures claim 7.5m illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Although that figure doesn't include an estimated further 1.5m undetected crossings. Some argue these figures are also vastly underestimated. Seems to be a very big problem to me and way way bigger than anything that happened under Trumps administration. Just saying it as I see it. A New York Court has found Trump guilty of breaching state laws regarding accounting practices. Whether the law is good or bad is irrelevant - the role of the court is to determine whether Trump is guilty or innocent of breaking the law, not make a judgement on the law itself. Those laws apply to every company within the jurisdiction of New York state, Trump included. The fact is Trump has been found to have broken the law. Whether you think it is a bad law is completely irrelevant. The point about immigration is that Trump is getting his Republican allies to stop the Democrats from passing legislation to address the problem so that he can blame the Democrats for causing the problem and, should he get re-elected, take the credit himself. If you think this behaviour is typical of people in business and politics you are completely lacking any sense of perspective. Trump's behaviour is way out there. I see the judge has just docked 300m off his fine. Maybe they have also started to see the goose has been over cooked. It all seems a bit like theatre really. Something I guess both sides get up to...
|
|
|
Post by Mason_Stokie on Mar 25, 2024 17:56:49 GMT
A New York Court has found Trump guilty of breaching state laws regarding accounting practices. Whether the law is good or bad is irrelevant - the role of the court is to determine whether Trump is guilty or innocent of breaking the law, not make a judgement on the law itself. Those laws apply to every company within the jurisdiction of New York state, Trump included. The fact is Trump has been found to have broken the law. Whether you think it is a bad law is completely irrelevant. The point about immigration is that Trump is getting his Republican allies to stop the Democrats from passing legislation to address the problem so that he can blame the Democrats for causing the problem and, should he get re-elected, take the credit himself. If you think this behaviour is typical of people in business and politics you are completely lacking any sense of perspective. Trump's behaviour is way out there. I see the judge has just docked 300m off his fine. Maybe they have also started to see the goose has been over cooked. It all seems a bit like theatre really. Something I guess both sides get up to... The fine hasn't been changed. The bond has been reduced.
|
|
|
Post by mickeythemaestro on Mar 25, 2024 18:06:14 GMT
I see the judge has just docked 300m off his fine. Maybe they have also started to see the goose has been over cooked. It all seems a bit like theatre really. Something I guess both sides get up to... The fine hasn't been changed. The bond has been reduced. Ah fair enough.
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Mar 25, 2024 19:36:39 GMT
Funny thread to be on if you don't wanna debate trump mate 😉 The excuses for trump's fraud to the banks look like typical propaganda to me. If other people did it he still shouldn't be above the law. If he defrauded bad people, he still shouldn't be above the law. I also don't just believe trump's team when they say "everyone is doing it". There are massive incentives to sue for fraud as well as criminal cases like trump's, so if everyone was doing it we'd see. I just don't think we should trust politicians. They should be investigated particularly hard. Hunter Biden is going through what sounds like extreme levels of investigation that wouldn't be chased anywhere near as much if his name was Smith. But I think that's good, you should have extra scrutiny on those linked to real power IMO. Basically I think the Bidens and Trumps should get more checks than random folk, the same level as each other. But the results might be different because one of them is just more corrupt and criminal than the other. (I haven't researched the border issue enough to have a strong opinion, but I'd like to know what you think Biden's done and should do) I'm no expert on politics or the American legal system but I just find it odd that firstly the bank in question didn't bring the case. The bank under oath said it didn't rely on trumps financial assessments and did their own anyway. And the bank also testified that they have been re paid in full. I'm actually struggling to see where the big bad crime is? Regards the border all I can see is that official figures claim 7.5m illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Although that figure doesn't include an estimated further 1.5m undetected crossings. Some argue these figures are also vastly underestimated. Seems to be a very big problem to me and way way bigger than anything that happened under Trumps administration. Just saying it as I see it. I'm not going to pretend to be up to speed on this one, but let's think it through a little. The banks did not end up out of pocket, and they may not have used Trump's valuations, which sounds plausible to me. However, what would have happened if Trump had gone bust on the deals, what then? The banks would have tried to recoup the money via secured assets that were not worth as much as reported. Do you think the banks would have a no harm no foul attitude? Furthermore, loans might be backed by insurance policies, so somewhere down the line, fraud would have been committed by Trump or the banks. All in all, it's not in the bank's interest to say bad things about Trump.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 26, 2024 7:58:25 GMT
I'm no expert on politics or the American legal system but I just find it odd that firstly the bank in question didn't bring the case. The bank under oath said it didn't rely on trumps financial assessments and did their own anyway. And the bank also testified that they have been re paid in full. I'm actually struggling to see where the big bad crime is? Regards the border all I can see is that official figures claim 7.5m illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Although that figure doesn't include an estimated further 1.5m undetected crossings. Some argue these figures are also vastly underestimated. Seems to be a very big problem to me and way way bigger than anything that happened under Trumps administration. Just saying it as I see it. I'm not going to pretend to be up to speed on this one, but let's think it through a little. The banks did not end up out of pocket, and they may not have used Trump's valuations, which sounds plausible to me. However, what would have happened if Trump had gone bust on the deals, what then? The banks would have tried to recoup the money via secured assets that were not worth as much as reported. Do you think the banks would have a no harm no foul attitude? Furthermore, loans might be backed by insurance policies, so somewhere down the line, fraud would have been committed by Trump or the banks. All in all, it's not in the bank's interest to say bad things about Trump. Absolutely. Trump misled the banks about his ability to secure his loan and if things had gone belly up the banks would have lost money and would have passed on their losses to their investors and their customers. The law is there to prevent unscrupulous business people (like Trump) from introducing unnecessary risk into the financial system. Trump committed fraud and fraud is not a trivial matter. I can't even see why he is appealing - the judge demolished his defence and he doesn't appear to be bringing forward any new evidence to support his case. His defence appears to be that he's Donald Trump so the rules don't apply - I can't see that going anywhere. In the meantime he's forking out 100+k a day in interest on his unpaid fine. It's no wonder the courts have given him more time - it's a nice little earner.
|
|
|
Post by georgeberrysafro on Mar 26, 2024 13:40:42 GMT
I'm not going to pretend to be up to speed on this one, but let's think it through a little. The banks did not end up out of pocket, and they may not have used Trump's valuations, which sounds plausible to me. However, what would have happened if Trump had gone bust on the deals, what then? The banks would have tried to recoup the money via secured assets that were not worth as much as reported. Do you think the banks would have a no harm no foul attitude? Furthermore, loans might be backed by insurance policies, so somewhere down the line, fraud would have been committed by Trump or the banks. All in all, it's not in the bank's interest to say bad things about Trump. Absolutely. Trump misled the banks about his ability to secure his loan and if things had gone belly up the banks would have lost money and would have passed on their losses to their investors and their customers. The law is there to prevent unscrupulous business people (like Trump) from introducing unnecessary risk into the financial system. Trump committed fraud and fraud is not a trivial matter. I can't even see why he is appealing - the judge demolished his defence and he doesn't appear to be bringing forward any new evidence to support his case. His defence appears to be that he's Donald Trump so the rules don't apply - I can't see that going anywhere. In the meantime he's forking out 100+k a day in interest on his unpaid fine. It's no wonder the courts have given him more time - it's a nice little earner. His tactics are clear. Delay eveything for as long as possible because IF he wins again this year he'll grant himself special 'Honest Don Presidential Immunity' so he can get away with anything he wants and pardon any corrupt idiot that helped him - though half of them now seem to be bankrupt, in jail, losing their licenses or suspended on some level. Though, seeing his inane ramblings last night I'm not sure he's going to survive until then - he's making old man Joe look sharp. The amount of people that don't understand Fraud is quite shocking.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 26, 2024 23:01:36 GMT
This really is NOT fake! 🤦♂️🤦
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Mar 26, 2024 23:52:33 GMT
This really is NOT fake! 🤦♂️🤦 Grifters gonna Grift At only $59.99 a bargain for committed Christians MAGAniacs The next big Trump endorsements will be for Snake Oil and Encyclopedia Britainnica It's way beyond asking what sort of idiot would vote for this Narcissist it's simply a Cult and you can check your brain at the Door along with your Gun.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 27, 2024 2:07:21 GMT
I'm really not interested in debating Trump. I know all about him, I know he's a nob and potentially a very dangerous one at that. I'm just sick of the narrative only being about Trump allowing the current administration to hide some epic levels of incompetence. And I would describe the current administrations handling of their southern border as absolutely outrageous. Yet there they are talking about trump telling his bank porkies to get a bigger loan. A practice pretty much all developers do to bigger or lesser degrees. I know its what I do for a living.. Thought everyone hated banks, so the sudden empathy is fucking hilarious 🤣 That handling of the southern border included a bill that passed the Senate to increase powers to clamp down on immigration. Trump had Johnson kill it in the House because he couldn’t have Biden be seen to be doing anything about immigration. Republicans - tough on immigration, unless it doesn’t suit them. I've realised loads of people just believe what politicians tell them and don't seem to care much about what those politicians actually do. The border bill had a load of Republican wishes in it and if Trump republicans wanted more they could have been honest and campaigned on that, then done another bill next year. But they chose to kill the bill instead. It blows my mind; why the fuck are do so many people trust what politicians say?! I think that's a really bad idea, look at what they actually do.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 27, 2024 2:14:19 GMT
Imagine what he'd be like if it was the year 2000 and there was genuine misgivings around what happened. Trump just repeats a lie in the hope it becomes truth. Not one single court he's been to has found any evidence of fraud. Looking back all those years you do wonder if Gore would have gone to Afghanistan if needed and the attacks happened etc and shows how much one decision can have huge consequences. Would Blsir still have become a poodle to whoever was in charge of the US etc at the time. Re Blair, or in reality every PM other than Wilson the answer is yes How would Gore have dealt with 911? Differently but would probably have still had to bomb the shit out of somebody If more people had voted for Gore, there wouldn't be limitless corporate funding for political action committees now. Bush's judges swung the votes in Citizens United and Arizona... vs Bennett. Unlimited corporate donations to corrupt politics are a pretty fucking huge difference in my book. Some people say "there'll be corruption anyway so don't make laws against it" but that's just insane to me. I think those people have just totally swallowed the corporate kool aid.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 27, 2024 2:16:40 GMT
Regards the border all I can see is that official figures claim 7.5m illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Although that figure doesn't include an estimated further 1.5m undetected crossings. Some argue these figures are also vastly underestimated. Seems to be a very big problem to me and way way bigger than anything that happened under Trumps administration. Just saying it as I see it. Ah I've seen those numbers but my first thought was - should I believe those politicians and media people? Are they ones who've been proven trustworthy? What do you hink the alleged 7.5 million means, do you think it means Biden let in 7.5 million people? How do you think it's Biden's fault, or what should he be doing about it? One of the ways I think about politics is to ask what they can actually do, and what they actually do. I just don't trust words from politicians or the media without them building up a lot of trust first.
|
|
|
Post by georgeberrysafro on Mar 27, 2024 15:38:41 GMT
This really is NOT fake! 🤦♂️🤦 How desperate is he? Wow. He can't even name a bible verse or qoute anything specific. Total fraudster. He's still comparing himself to Jesus as well. The only decent thing about him 'believing in God' is that at least he's going to burn in hell for eternal damnation. He'll be selling a Trump version of Mein Kampf soon. Donald Trump unable to name one verse from "favourite book" The Bible
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 27, 2024 16:00:48 GMT
This really is NOT fake! 🤦♂️🤦 How desperate is he? Wow. He can't even name a bible verse or qoute anything specific. Total fraudster. He's still comparing himself to Jesus as well. The only decent thing about him 'believing in God' is that at least he's going to burn in hell for eternal damnation. He'll be selling a Trump version of Mein Kampf soon. Donald Trump unable to name one verse from "favourite book" The BibleWhen a political leader starts invoking religion in that way and start associating god with their country you know that country is heading for a bad place. It's outrageous to include the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights in there - it gives the impression they are addendums to the bible. It's particularly bad in that the founding fathers went to great lengths to separate church from state in the constitution - they would be turning in their graves at this.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Mar 27, 2024 16:28:53 GMT
How desperate is he? Wow. He can't even name a bible verse or qoute anything specific. Total fraudster. He's still comparing himself to Jesus as well. The only decent thing about him 'believing in God' is that at least he's going to burn in hell for eternal damnation. He'll be selling a Trump version of Mein Kampf soon. Donald Trump unable to name one verse from "favourite book" The BibleWhen a political leader starts invoking religion in that way and start associating god with their country you know that country is heading for a bad place. It's outrageous to include the American Constitution and the Bill of Rights in there - it gives the impression they are addendums to the bible. It's particularly bad in that the founding fathers went to great lengths to separate church from state in the constitution - they would be turning in their graves at this. I'm pretty sure that the 1st Amendment rights ensure that government can not impose a state sponsored religion on the people. It also ensures that every religion is protected and can be practised not just Christianity. So a God Bless the USA Bible is anathema to the constitution. You'd think a president might know the constitution.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 27, 2024 16:59:27 GMT
I'm pretty sure that the 1st Amendment rights ensure that government can not impose a state sponsored religion on the people. It also ensures that every religion is protected and can be practised not just Christianity. So a God Bless the USA Bible is anathema to the constitution. You'd think a president might know the constitution. It's not that much text and seems obvious. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The legal people I follow are saying that now the republicans have an iron grip on the supreme court it's basically just doing their bidding, so there's not much hope that the constitution and laws will protect people's rights any more. No idea how reliable those legal people are though.
|
|