Adult Content Warning

This community may contain adult content that is not suitable for minors. By closing this dialog box or continuing to navigate this site, you certify that you are 18 years of age and consent to view adult content.

Elephants and Jackasses...

Discussion in 'Permanent Threads' started by Nettdata, Oct 14, 2016.

  1. downndirty

    downndirty
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    500
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,585
    I don't disagree, the media narrative of worst case scenario (freezing or seizing Trump assets) feels unrealistic to me. And yes, he will probably wiggle out of this.

    The idea that some rich backer comes in to bail him out is far fetched. #1, he's toxic. Just ask Mike Lindell or Tucker Carlson or Giuliani. Fronting that kind of money to Trump guarantees you nothing but grief. It's extremely likely you'd lose money. Either he loses the election and the appeal, and can't pay you back (and your ability to hold him to his agreement is severely limited, compared to the state of NY) or he wins the election and paying you back is an option if he feels like it, because what the fuck could you do to a sitting us president? Not to mention being seen doing business with him at this point alienates you from a vocal contingent of who ever he's pissed off recently. Jews? Sure. Women? Absolutely. Immigrants? Of course.

    Also also...trumps finances may be dirty. You don't know where that money is coming from, and if it's illegally diverted from campaign funds, or if it emerges that it's revenues from blacklisted Russian companies or whatever, now you are in hot water, and its not like he's helpful.

    #2, it'd emasculate Trump. He'd be in some rich twats debt...and yet still be rich himself?
    What billionaire who told the court he had $400m somehow is then so broke he has to beg for a loan, hat in hand?

    His base simply doesn't see business like that as anything but admitting he's a loser, or that he was clearly and blatantly lying. He'd be better off losing the properties (until they are audited and shit really gets scary).

    #3 it doesn't look good for someone who's supposed to be president in a few months owing someone like Elon Musk a favor. His base may not understand conflict of interest, but that sort of deal is swampy as hell.

    The Chaus and Mnuchins and Tillersons of his administration were at least quiet about it, and could be replaced. Trump publicly owing someone a half billion, in addition to the debt his business has already incurred...that is simply sketchy as fuck.

    Bottom line is Trump is doing well in the primaries, as he always does. He will win some states, and significant ones like Texas and Florida.

    In every other respect, his movement and his enterprise are fracturing.

    He hasn't added to his base, and it's shrinking by his own actions.

    The actual legislation done by Magats can't survive the SC that he loaded.

    He can't fundraise.

    His support is two-faced at best...he knows people like Mitch McConnell would rather stab him in the back, and will the second they can.

    His business empire probably can't survive much longer, and the litigation opened up by NY is just a beginning. There's no one he trusts to run it nor no one capable of assuming the mantle.

    His takeover of the RNC was a desperate way to get their resources aligned to his needs, and the GOP candidates who are starving for those resources won't forget it.

    The same GOP who can't stop fighting amidst themselves and are basically surrendering a majority to cunts like MTG and Matt Gaetz, who are only effective at being in the headlines...they wont help him win anyone moderate or on the fence. They only amplify his liabilities.

    He may still win, and it's foolish to bet against him on 100% of this mess, but I cannot see him recovering from all of this at his age and health. It's not going down in flames, but there's smoke below deck and it's starting to billow.

    His best shot is to delay, and if he loses the election, beg Biden for a pardon and retire quietly in exchange for immunity. If he wins, all bets are off. But...I just fail to see how he wins, or even mounts an effective campaign.
     
  2. xrayvision

    xrayvision
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    525
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,408
    Location:
    Hyewston
    It also makes him the definition of being compromised. But we already knew that from previous interactions. But if he somehow comes by the money he needs to get out of this temporarily, he will be beholden to most likely some foreign entity with interests opposed to this country’s well-being.
     
  3. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,363
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,570
    Whoa, whoa, whoa. You're saying a U.S. politician might make a deal that benefits them politically AND is personally financially rewarding? GASP
     
  4. downndirty

    downndirty
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    500
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,585
    No, I think he's saying he'd make a deal that is literally a crime if I did it.

    Like...if I owed a Russian bank for my mortgage, I'd lose my clearance.

    It's why they put holdings in escrow or trusts while serving...until El Tangerino thought he could do both.

    I can say the things I saw during covid working on WH task forces, the contracting side was absolutely illegal and under any normal administration would have been a tremendous scandal.
     
  5. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,363
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,570
    Again. If you think Presidents and Senators haven't done this before, you're living with your head in the sand. Representatives not as much, because I think they have less opportunity.

    I mean, hell, they used to be EXEMPT from insider trading altogether until Obama signed a law that restricted it. wtf

    FOIA allows requests to Federal Agencies, but Congress is exempt. Congress exempts itself from things other companies must follow. There is literally a speech & debate clause that protects them from saying things, that if YOU said them, you could be sued for slander. There is still insider trading, K Street tips from lobbyists, adding a benefit in one sentence of 20 page legislation, hiding things in the tax code, advance notice . . .
     
  6. downndirty

    downndirty
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    500
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,585
    Insider trading is different than a bunch of foreign companies that I owe money to. The issue isn't a Congress critter having insider information, the issue is an entity exerting influence on a sitting US president because his business interests are entwined with them.

    The idea that these are similar is mistaken.

    A congressman owning stocks is way less of a threat than the president owing hundreds of millions to a German bank, or receiving millions of dollars from Saudi, Chinese or Russian businesses.

    Yes, this happened to the Bush family, but it wasn't this egregious, nor was it a direct line of ownership to the president.
     
  7. xrayvision

    xrayvision
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    525
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,408
    Location:
    Hyewston
    I agree. If you look at it on a smaller scale, they do credit checks on average people for certain types of jobs before extending an offer to make sure they don’t have any financial liabilities that could make them a risk. People who might require a security clearance for a government job will be flagged because of certain forms of debt. But for some reason, it’s okay if it’s the president? Taking a half a billion from Russia or China for example especially while they are in very delicate and volatile circumstances and which they would benefit greatly from our intelligence would demonstrate the clearest example of a compromised person. Shit Robert Hanssen sold us out for a million bucks. You think Trump wouldn’t sell his own daughter to square up some debts?
     
  8. Juice

    Juice
    Expand Collapse
    Moderately Gender Fluid

    Reputation:
    1,447
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    13,937
    Location:
    Boston
    I think the issue of Congress people insider trading is absolutely an issue by itself. They should not be able to dump stock because they received non-public reports about a growing pandemic. This is a bipartisan issue that should be a no-brainer.
     
  9. downndirty

    downndirty
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    500
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,585
    I 100% agree that an elected or appointed official should not be allowed to trade stocks until they are out of office. Put it escrow, or hell....add your holdings to the same retirement plan the rest of the feds are forced to use, and do your job without getting rich.

    https://www.vox.com/2024-elections/...ility-rising-latino-black-young-working-class

    I kind of worry that Trump's gaining an advantage just by being in the headlines. It doesn't matter WHY he's in the news, it matters that he's topical, trending and getting tons of free press (again). Trump is a master of manipulating the media and his worst enemy is silence...and every outlet runs with any speculation or nonsense from any of his trials, to the point that it's hard to understand what's actually happening. One of the things that put him over the top in 2016 was that he could drown out the other candidates with a media shit storm that he didn't pay a cent for. I think the free press he gets for the legal troubles is hard to calculate, but it doesn't hurt in a massive popularity contest.
     
  10. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,363
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,570
    Federal budget of $1.2 trillion has to be passed by tomorrow, or another shut down? There's $90 billion in "discretionary funding" for Homeland Security. I was glad I had a $1 off coupon for my lunch yesterday. I just operate in a different world than Congress. Must be wild.
     
  11. downndirty

    downndirty
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    500
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,585
    Most of that (5 of 6 or 7 of 8) has already passed. The sticking point is DHS, because of border wall butt-fuckery. The "discretionary" funding is misleading, because some of that pool goes to DHS programs like FEMA for disaster declarations, or TSA for unexpected upticks in travelers, that kind of thing. That funding is a bit higher than normal, because the fiscal year ended in fucking September and we haven't had an appropriation since then.

    From what I can recall, there's a pretty huge chunk of COVID money that's still technically available, and we've set records for billion-dollar+ disasters each year since 2017, with no signs of slowing down. It'd be 5-6 years before our investments in mitigation and resilience paid off anyway. So, $90b is to keep FEMA and the rest of DHS (Coast Guard, TSA, CBP, ICE, CISA and Secret Service) from coming back to Congress too soon, and to pay back some of the funds we've burned over the last 6 months without an official appropriation, AND to top off the "tank" funding like the Disaster Relief Fund.

    I dunno about the rest of these agencies, but our management reserve funds won't touch the unpredictable disaster season. Also, FIMA is functionally insolvent, but no one knows how bad until spring floods start...right about...
     
  12. GcDiaz

    GcDiaz
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    103
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,532
    Biden would be a senile old fool to believe him.
     
  13. downndirty

    downndirty
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    500
    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2009
    Messages:
    4,585
  14. dixiebandit69

    dixiebandit69
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    865
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    4,368
    Location:
    The asshole of Texas
  15. Kubla Kahn

    Kubla Kahn
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    729
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    11,499
  16. dixiebandit69

    dixiebandit69
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    865
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    4,368
    Location:
    The asshole of Texas
  17. Rush-O-Matic

    Rush-O-Matic
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    1,363
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    12,570
    For him, it's probably something personal like his health or a family member's. He's got is 5+ years service to get pension at 62, and his military service, and he couldn't convince the US to buy Greenland. So, it was probably just time. That seat will easily still be Red based on the district he serves.
     
  18. Fiveslide

    Fiveslide
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    447
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,528
    Damn, that guy invests the way I do, buying land that people may not want right now, but years from now.... cha-ching, maybe. Who elected an idiot like me to congress?
     
  19. GcDiaz

    GcDiaz
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    103
    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,532
  20. dixiebandit69

    dixiebandit69
    Expand Collapse
    Emotionally Jaded

    Reputation:
    865
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Messages:
    4,368
    Location:
    The asshole of Texas