Trump calls it like it is; the establishment can't take it - Page 165 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14696366
SpecialOlympian wrote:Image






Scotland is part of the UK, and UK voted for their independence.
It is obvious that Trump refers to the UK, not the province Scotland, there is no state, called Scotland, and such a state never existed.
#14696369
there is no state, called Scotland,


Correct but there is a Country and Nation called scotland. Noone was dancing in the streets here or even in England for that matter. The lack of celebration anywhere is quite eerie actually. It is not unreasonable for trump to assume it was happening I suppose.

and such a state never existed


Yes it did - before 1707.
#14696398
The speaking fee is going to her personally though, which is more problematic (even if she gives a lot of it to charity).


I don't see why. If any presidential candidate were to want simply to make money they could do far better than to run for President. A former Secretary of State could command vastly more in salary than the president earns.

Again though. Do you not think it odd that Trump criticizes Hillary for earning a lot of money when it that of which he is most proud?

Trust me. For someone as wealthy as Hillary was before she ever took her first post-Secretary of State speakers fee, she would much rather have the campaign contributions.
#14696400
layman wrote:
Correct but there is a Country and Nation called scotland. Noone was dancing in the streets here or even in England for that matter.


There exists an ethnic division in GB, the native Brits predominantly voted for abandoning the EU, the "new Brits", speak the migrants, voted for the EU, because they do not feel any affiliation to UK.

The same is true for Sotland, you have to distinguish between big cities and the countryside, speak the Real Scots.


layman wrote: The lack of celebration anywhere is quite eerie actually. It is not unreasonable for trump to assume it was happening I suppose.



You see the world through the glasses of the BBC, speak its director Cohen, who tried very hard to persuade the Brits that EU is in their interest, lying about the real situation in GB.

What to Cohen, he is not even sure if he is a Brit or an Israeli, but he believes that he knows what is good for Brits.
#14696603
looks like the contest for the most powerful person in the world is to be decided by which candidate gets off the best insults on his or her opponent. This dynamic is inherently vapid and counter productive. I guess I must "blame" trump for bringing this new level of stupidity to the debate. Oh well, it will at least provide entertainment.
#14696673
Rugoz wrote:Trump is also a narcissistic asshole and a clueless buffoon.

So you're a globalist? How does losing feel?

Dave wrote:Libertarianism, like communism and liberalism, is a religion.

You're absolutely right.

Drlee wrote:Whining about Hillary's speaking fees is really pretty funny. Blackjack calling them bribes is hilarious. He gets his panties in a knot when she gets $250K for speaking completely ignoring Trump's 1.5 million fees.

I always knew your condescesion meant you were cheap. I've never believed in Trump. It's my thread, so there's that. I just knew he'd be a significant factor, and I've been proven right. So the latest plan is to throw $2B in negative ads against Trump, but he beat Jeb Bush who had $150M in the bank. You, who are bitter about Citizens United, come out of the closet for Hillary Clinton? Tell us what was wrong with Hitler? Why did we fight him? Why did we fight Germany? Why are you on the side of George W. Bush's treasury secretary? Can you explain that without me bringing up an ethnic slur or a sexual orientation? Am I spot on?

For what it's worth, I've just cursed out my best friend this morning for talking me out of going short. I haven't been this pissed off, since he talked me out of going short in 2008. Maybe I need to reexamine my friendships.
#14696684
For what it's worth, I've just cursed out my best friend this morning for talking me out of going short. I haven't been this pissed off, since he talked me out of going short in 2008. Maybe I need to reexamine my friendships.

There's an even better solution, blackjack: stay friends with him, but stop listening to his idiotic financial advice. ;)
#14696685
I thought this was obvious but apparently no one's going to point out that Trump wasn't in politics until recently and has enough business success that people might actually want to hear him speak. So Hillary, with no business success or experience she can openly claim to have, gets paid to speak to Goldman Sachs, that's weird. Trump getting paid to speak to people, apples to oranges isn't it. I can't tell if Drlee is a troll and that's not acceptable because he isn't funny.
#14696714
So Hillary, with no business success or experience she can openly claim to have, gets paid to speak to Goldman Sachs, that's weird.



Jesus man. Think through an issue. Just a little. Really try.

Let me lead you a little.

Let's see. Why would Goldman Sachs, a leader in GOLBAL capital markets want to hear from the perspective of the (arguably) most powerful diplomat in the world? One who negotiates trade deals that directly affect them? One who represents the largest economy in the world? One who has insights into the government's view on the financial markets and those of all the players in the world?

Trump represents (at best) a couple of billion dollars in overseas capital. The US Government, oh, I don't know, a few trillion? :roll:

No go with me some more.


Hillary has been the presumptive democratic nominee for several years. Even if she wasn't she has served in the US Senate. Representing Goldman Sachs' home state. You know the US Senate don't you? That is the one that signs off on all of the regulations, laws and trade deals that affect Goldman Sachs. What possibly could they want to learn from her? :roll:

Now suppose that she is to become the next US president. There has always been an odds-on chance she would. Why would Goldman Sachs want to know what the president thinks about their industry? Why would they want to have an insight into the business environment of the future.

No offense but it is this level of shallow that is killing us. Before you go into full-blown "defend Trump" mode stop and think for a moment.

There is a very good chance that this time next year Hillary will be the most powerful person in the world. The leader of the largest military and virtual comptroller of the largest economy in the world. One who will appoint the next two or three Supreme Court justices which will decide the course of this juggernaut for a few decades. My advice to you is that you learn something about her. I am not talking about what Trump's drones tell you or what Fox News sells you. I am talking about learning on your own from all perspectives even if you dislike her. That would be the smart thing to do. There is no corner of the world where US influence does not extend and that includes the PRC. And when it comes to international relations ESPECIALLY the PRC.

I can't tell if Drlee is a troll and that's not acceptable because he isn't funny.


Re-read the above. I believe I answered your questions.
#14696743
Drlee wrote:Whining about Hillary's speaking fees is really pretty funny.

Well, if she actually had anything to say, it wouldn't be suspicious at all. Paying someone like Aristotle or Plato to come and talk to a group would be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

But Hillary has nothing to say. So her "speeches" amount to her receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars for promising to kiss the right asses "when" she gets herself elected.

"Thank you for this million smackers, AIPAC. Now let me list all the reasons why I am willing to sell out America to defend your interests. First, Jerusalem is the single, undivided, and eternal capital of Ashkenazi interests. Second..."

Ching, ching.
#14697000
Drlee wrote:Jesus man. Think through an issue. Just a little. Really try.

Let me lead you a little.

Let's see. Why would Goldman Sachs, a leader in GOLBAL capital markets want to hear from the perspective of the (arguably) most powerful diplomat in the world? One who negotiates trade deals that directly affect them? One who represents the largest economy in the world? One who has insights into the government's view on the financial markets and those of all the players in the world?

Trump represents (at best) a couple of billion dollars in overseas capital. The US Government, oh, I don't know, a few trillion? :roll:

No go with me some more.


Hillary has been the presumptive democratic nominee for several years. Even if she wasn't she has served in the US Senate. Representing Goldman Sachs' home state. You know the US Senate don't you? That is the one that signs off on all of the regulations, laws and trade deals that affect Goldman Sachs. What possibly could they want to learn from her? :roll:

Now suppose that she is to become the next US president. There has always been an odds-on chance she would. Why would Goldman Sachs want to know what the president thinks about their industry? Why would they want to have an insight into the business environment of the future.

No offense but it is this level of shallow that is killing us. Before you go into full-blown "defend Trump" mode stop and think for a moment.

There is a very good chance that this time next year Hillary will be the most powerful person in the world. The leader of the largest military and virtual comptroller of the largest economy in the world. One who will appoint the next two or three Supreme Court justices which will decide the course of this juggernaut for a few decades. My advice to you is that you learn something about her. I am not talking about what Trump's drones tell you or what Fox News sells you. I am talking about learning on your own from all perspectives even if you dislike her. That would be the smart thing to do. There is no corner of the world where US influence does not extend and that includes the PRC. And when it comes to international relations ESPECIALLY the PRC.



Re-read the above. I believe I answered your questions.

Great post, you took all of the criticisms about Hillary being corrupt and spun them to sound reasonable. The problem here is that being in the Senate and voting for bills doesn't actually mean that Hillary understands anything she is voting for. The bills are crafted by experts, the lobbying is explained by lobbyists, Hillary is just a necessary appendage or face upon the process. So your spin was getting pretty overwound by the time you started arguing that her possibly being President is a legitimate reason to pay her money. I think you lost the plot somewhere, possibly being President is supposed to be a reason she does NOT get paid by Goldman Sachs.
#14697036
.
The problem here is that being in the Senate and voting for bills doesn't actually mean that Hillary understands anything she is voting for.


Get real. :roll: IF you have an argument please make it. Do not simply rely on hackneyed old nonsense.



The bills are crafted by experts, the lobbying is explained by lobbyists, Hillary is just a necessary appendage or face upon the process.


This is a also nonsense. But by your reasoning it does not matter who is president or in our legislature. I can assure you it does. The peace and stability of the entire world depends on it.



So your spin was getting pretty overwound by the time you started arguing that her possibly being President is a legitimate reason to pay her money.


Of course it is. The question is not that she gets money for a speech but rather whether there is influence peddling going on. As I have repeatedly said, you can not buy a president for $250K. At least not a US one.



I think you lost the plot somewhere, possibly being President is supposed to be a reason she does NOT get paid by Goldman Sachs.


When she is president she will not. Do try to follow along. You might learn something.


#14697039
Apparently Trump paid Hillary $100K to go to his son's wedding, so I expect Hillary to take a dive sometime before November.

I don't see why it's surprising that presidents or those who worked closely with them would command high speaking fees. It's not common for presidents to continue in politics after their presidency ends, and giving speeches is a lucrative way to continue earning income without tarnishing your legacy.

If corruption were my primary concern for this election, I don't think I'd vote for the guy who ran a "school" that basically pressured people into giving them money for nothing besides a crash course on real estate and a picture of yourself with a cardboard cutout of Trump.
#14697040
If corruption were my primary concern for this election, I don't think I'd vote for the guy who ran a "school" that basically pressured people into giving them money for nothing besides a crash course on real estate and a picture of yourself with a cardboard cutout of Trump.

This is actually the one thing I like about Trump. All of his business dealings have the socially progressive effect of redistributing wealth from rich, stupid people to those who most deserve it - clever, opportunistic bastards such as himself. He's the Che Guevara of capitalism! :up:
  • 1
  • 163
  • 164
  • 165
  • 166
  • 167
  • 676

If there is evidence showing that it is more plaus[…]

Yes, we know you believe Amit Soussana is a liar ([…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

^ I shared the Sachs and Meirsheimer videos in her[…]

Hmmm, it the Ukraine aid package is all over mains[…]