That's every Presidents priority.
Honestly
Are you saying if you was President you would hire an A.G. or anyone, that is aligned differently politically, and dislikes you?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump's Complete Failure as a Business Man
- Thread starter sealchan
- Start date
That's every Presidents priority.
Honestly
Are you saying if you was President you would hire an A.G. or anyone, that is aligned differently politically, and dislikes you?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, it is not. That is not the job of the Attorney General. Seriously.
And you need to ask proper questions. It is not a matter of being different politically. It matters whether he follows the rule of law or not. Jeff Sessions was very conservative, but he followed the rule of law. Trump did not like that.
That's all fine and well haroomph talk.
But history is not fleshed out as you idealize it. Now is it?
Last edited:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Actually it is. Very few Attorney Generals were openly dishonest and corrupt. You really should study history a bit. You should review what happened with Nixon. Nixon was at least smart enough to cut a deal.
You are just too much. I'd love to think you're just that naive and..........special. But I know that's not the case. So I'm just gonna let it go and go over here..........
Anyways I'm done with this.
See ya in 4-5 years when the court makes a decison.
Just fyi, the last case where executive privilege was used. Started half way thru Obama's 2nd term, and it just now came to a decision in the courts about 2 months ago which is 3 years into Trumps first term.
So if I was you I would buckle up buckaroo. Its gonna be a long slow boring ride that everyone will eventually forget about and no longer give a single eff when it's done, because Trump will be done with his 2nd term by then. Maybe just maybe if your lucky you'll get to impeach him a few months before he is due to leave anyways. Oh think about how sweet that will feel. You will finally get to get rid of Trump!
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Why do you think that just because Trump is a worthless piece of crap that all Presidents were the same? This does not bode well for you.
You are just too much. I'd love to think you're just that naive and..........special. But I know that's not the case. So I'm just gonna let it go and go over here..........
Anyways I'm done with this.
See ya in 4-5 years when the court makes a decison.
Just fyi, the last case where executive privilege was used. Started half way thru Obama's 2nd term, and it just now came to a decision in the courts about 2 months ago which is 3 years into Trumps first term.
So if I was you I would buckle up buckaroo. Its gonna be a long slow boring ride that everyone will eventually forget about and no longer give a single eff when it's done, because Trump will be done with his 2nd term by then. Maybe just maybe if your lucky you'll get to impeach him a few months before he is due to leave anyways. Oh think about how sweet that will feel. You will finally get to get rid of Trump!
And seriously why do you think America is full of idiots and immoral fools? A good economy will not necessarily save Trump, especially after he screwed over so many that supported him. Do you think coal workers are going to support him? There was the teeniest tiniest of upticks in their jobs, nowhere near the employment that he promised:
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
How about the automotive industry. Surely that recovered under Trump:
Oops, no. Yes, the hours worked by individual employees went back to the old levels, but the number of thousands of employees went from 1.1 million to 700 thousand. Another fail by Trump. The jobs that people have picked up tend to be lower wage jobs. People's wages have no recovered. And those that are still working low paying jobs won't forget when the election comes along.
The economy is good if you are in the upper class, but Trump needs to win the lower middle class if he wants to be reelected.
Because they are men (mankind not the sex/gender/whateverthenewPCwordis).
Potus is, arguably, the most powerful man in the world.
We know for a fact ole Bill was doing dom raunchy things with Monica and a few others. But do you think Hillary wasn't getting hers from a 20 year old? That old bag probably had 3 guys at a time while Bill watched silently in the corner...
Obama, Bush, heck probably even Reagan. They all getting in them late night "special counsel" meetings. Same goes for their wives. I guarantee while Obama was getting his "flagpole" cleaned in the Oval office Michelle was getting hers cleaned by some young hot guy....
But anyways.... I digress...
There are only 3 types of people that actually live in your idealistic little world.
The totally naive and innocent caught up in an idealistic world.
And the narcissistic sociopaths that manipulate and create that idealistic world.
And then there's people like me who see through all ya'lls horsep00p and call it for what it exactly is......horsep00p.
I ain't gonna sit here and pretend like "haroomph my politician would never do that". Because its BS and you know it. So yeah i don't want to hear it.
Last edited:
sealchan
Well-Known Member
For those who feel that Trumps apparent losses as claimed on his taxes represents a reflection of depreciation costs the video on this page suggests that the numbers are too high to account for that:
How many stinking rich people are there in the US? - CNNPolitics
"The devil is in the details" is the opinion offered.
How many stinking rich people are there in the US? - CNNPolitics
"The devil is in the details" is the opinion offered.
Perusing your linked article, I didn't see any such analysis.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
The video, not the article...in pursuit of always presenting video content on every page, CNN often puts up a video indirectly related to an article.
sooda
Veteran Member
The New York Times has published great gobs of data from information it received from Donald Trump's Internal Revenue Service tax transcripts between 1985 and 1994. At last some hard facts have been found with which to compare the hype that Trump peddled to claim for himself a spot among the most brilliant moneymakers in the universe.
What are the big takeaways from the numbers? Hold on to your hats because, as Trump might say, the news is yuuuuge.
It turns out that young Trump's claim to great riches was, at times, completely made up. He was, instead, desperately burdened by debt that topped $1 billion. It seems that his business acumen was at best questionable, at worst fake -- as were his vast profits. Says the Times: "Over all, Mr. Trump lost so much money that he was able to avoid paying income taxes for eight of the 10 years." The man Trump presented in his book "The Art of the Deal" was a fiction.
continued
sooda
Veteran Member
Enoch, Trump is like PT Barnum.
Citing debt doesn't address net worth.
So far, no one claiming his total failure has compared his
net worth way back when with his net worth now.
That would be a quantified measure of success or failure.
But without it, people are seeing what they want to see.
Could you put the analysis from the video in your own words?
(Quantitative reasoning in videos is difficult. I watch videos
for entertainment....with either boobies or Homer Simpson.
Preferably not with the former on the latter.)
sooda
Veteran Member
You sure have a low opinion of human beings.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
There is nothing quantitative...it is a claim that I was hoping you would respond to...that the amount of losses is too great to explain in terms of depreciation alone...which, as I may recall incorrectly, was one reason you gave for that information to be misleading. Well i suppose that is quantitative just not at all specific.
I'm treating you like an expert and simply pulling up other expert testimony in order to learn more.
Depreciation is just one possible component.
I'd like to see analysis by a neutral CPA with access
to all years of tax returns & financial statements.
I'm neither an expert nor knowledgeable about his taxes or finances.
I just offer my perspective.