Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I think we just gotta ask ourselves... If a president will lie about something as trivial as his weight and height... What else is he gonna lie about? How can we trust him?It is fascinating how the left fixates on Trump's height, as if that is relevant at all to the unprecedented political upheaval and mass demolishment of the constitution and due process of law
for once i actually completely agree with you
The same article says that that's not true:QuoteThe claim that the NYPD publicly revealed Trump's height and weight is false. Neither the NYPD nor the New York State Police has made any announcement about Trump’s height or weight, nor have they publicly released any booking details following his indictment. HindustanTimes.com didn't find anything on either the NYPD or State Police's websites, Instagram, X, Facebook, or YouTube handles during their verification.
This is relatively minor news given the abducting and exiling of American citizens without due process and the dismantling of both the federal government and the economy, but it's worth noting that Trump is once again lying on his annual physical:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/13/politics/trumps-health-report/index.html
No doctor wrote this. Bragging about Trump's golf victories is a clear indication that this was written by one of Trump's stooges and simply signed off on by a doctor, while the details themselves were obviously simply provided by Trump and not the result of any kind of examination. I've proved before that Trump's claim of being 6'3 is a blatant lie. Weight isn't as easily proved by just looking, but I'm still certain that Trump, with his visible obesity, weighs well over 224 lbs.
The whole tenor of your post is indicative of a desire to change how the US economic structure exists. It is patently evident.Hey, if you wanted to kill alot of people, you need a gun.
The use of the word, "need," is beyond dispute.
Oh, yes...I would not know what you support and I am looking pathetic...^The word, "Capitalism," generated by an Occupy Wall Street supporter...Bitch, commenting on something almost 20 years old, that you don't even KNOW what I supported, just makes you look pathetic.
Will wonders never cease?If they want to actually do something, they need to strike fear into the hearts of the business investors and crash the market, thereby sending everyone into poverty.
See, evidence shows I was wrong and you didn't support what OWS was doing (I apologize)...
No, you wanted them to go FURTHER and drive everyone into POVERTY, while here, in this very thread, you are complaining that Trump is trying to do the same thing!
LMMFAO!!!
For real!!!
Honestly, this protest is rather pointless.
They're attempting to bring to light what everyone already knows. Or at least what everyone knows they think.
Wall Street knows how they feel.
Main Street knows how they feel.
Nothing is going to happen since Main Street and Wall Street both ensure that the same politicians that are able to keep this stuff happening will remain in power. This is just a bunch of people who feel cheated blowing off some steam.
If they want to actually do something, they need to strike fear into the hearts of the business investors and crash the market, thereby sending everyone into poverty.
Quote from: Vindictus on October 09, 2011, 03:20:41 PM
Quote from: Lorddave on October 09, 2011, 02:45:35 PM
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on October 09, 2011, 02:37:34 PM
If government is the problem march on the White House. Thats where the problem is.
How so?
Did a President tell the banks that they are above the law? Did a president tell the Banking system that the American People are ignorant and you should give them loans they can't actually afford? Did a president write any law currently in effect that's harming or helping our economy?
Yes.
All of the above?
Modify message
Report to moderator 98.15.192.35
^The word, "Capitalism," generated by an Occupy Wall Street supporter...Bitch, commenting on something almost 20 years old, that you don't even KNOW what I supported, just makes you look pathetic.
Will wonders never cease?
If not, then cheaper foreign alternative it is.^ The king of equitable outcomes, ladies and germs...
Your knowledge of China's labor economy is pathetic. Go learn.I wonder how much the tariffs will affect the price of MAGA merch.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tg8PQzgV4ls?feature=share
The fact that this store even exists owns the libs. I'm not sure why you want to bring it up and remind us that Trump is populist king. Where is the Joe Biden storefront, or the Kamala or Obama store? Do you have the addresses for those? Outside of online gift shops, no commercial physical stores exist for them, even when they were in office.
Considering that overseas goods are often sold for 10-30x the wholesale price, it is possible that even the current 124% tariff on China would barely have an affect on price, or no effect depending on the greed of the intermediary companies. Trump has made a point that some of his items are made overseas by necessity and lack of US manufacturing presence. Increasing amounts of tariffs are the remedy for this. With new factories in the US and modernized automation, it's also possible that a product could be built for cheaper than what traditional Chinese sweatshops could produce, stamping them out for nothing. Electricity and mechanical maintenance on industrial machinery is currently cheaper than overseas manual labor.
Oh and DOGE has tried for reality.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/elon-musk-drastically-drops-doge-112308234.html?guccounter=1
From $2 Trillion to $150 Billion.
From this article:In a cabinet meeting on Thursday, Musk told Trump the group expected to slash $150 billion from the federal budget over the fiscal year, which runs from the beginning of October 2025 to the end of September 2026.
“I’m excited to announce that we anticipate savings in ’26 from reduction of waste and fraud by $150 billion,” Musk told Trump in the meeting. The world's richest man said these cuts "will actually result in better services for the American people."
The article goes on to review the DOGE website, which states and that an estimated $150 billion has been saved so far:"According to DOGE's website, which tracks canceled contracts, grants, and leases and publicly displays a sample, the team has already saved an estimated $150 billion. It's unclear if Musk meant to say the $150 billion was the final goal or just what the team had already found."
Regarding that last sentence, maybe they should have applied some journalistic integrity and cleared up that important piece of information before writing this article, because "we anticipate savings" could mean either 'so far' or 'for the year'. Since the website states the same $150 billion number as the amount which has been already saved, it casts doubt on the allegation that this number is the anticipated savings for the entire year.
Why does the author title the article that the goal was dropped to $150 billion, based on something the author admits that they are unclear about? The above statement says that DOGE has "already saved" $150 billion, but the author of the article doesn't know if $150 billion is the final goal. What kind of writing is this?
The article continues:The White House did not immediately respond to Fortune's request for comment, however, an official told the New York Times the $1 trillion figure was still "the goal."
Okay, so if the goal is $1 trillion, how could $150 billion be the goal? Why does the the author think that they can interview officials and get a number, but still put forward a number they are unclear about in the article headline as fact?
This article is poorly written and contradicts itself from one sentence to the next. This is the sort of writing that would get a failing grade in middle school. Oddly, this whole article is based on "I thought a thing" while proceeding to present several pieces of evidence that the thing they thought is wrong.
We really are living in the stupidest timelineCult.
That's 37.5 gallons. Mar-a-Largo must get shampoo delivered by tanker truck.
Good to see that while dealing with trivial matters like breaking the world economy he hasn't lost sight of the really important stuff
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2eeggyppzo
Didn't you just say how making it lower was good?
Also, this is because he just paused almost all the tariffs. Why? If this was the best solutions why stop it when it barely started?
It doesn't really matter to me if the multinationals sink, but it apparently matters a lot to the liberals. Which is weird, because over the few years the liberals have been preaching about the evils of big business, what with "occupy wall street" and "eat the rich".
Trump paused the tariffs for the 75 countries who wanted to negotiate. This is something which you leftists did not account for in all of your bawwing. Trump holds the cards, and ultimate control over the economy. After the pause is finished, it will be more difficult to cause a stock market panic, and the world will simply ease into the tarrif paradigm.
Laughably, leftists were predicting a US Recession, and have now rescinded their predictions.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/goldman-calls-us-recession-1257pm-73-minutes-later-rescinds-recession-call
Well... My parents have a 401k and a large chunk of people work for big companies that tend to lay off employees when their stock value drops.Well, this tells everyone here you were part of the Occupy Wall Street, roundly cheering on the market collapse in 2008.
So... Yeah, I care. You don't because, obviously, you're too poor to notice anything.
By the way, losing interest gains is part of the market as everyone knows. Cannot help it if your parents were too stupid to find reliable employment and they raised someone who would go on to cheer loudly for economic collapse.
