Market right now is about as logical as Trump
Market right now is about as logical as Trump
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
OLD SMTC SOB wrote:
Well as they say............put up or shut up.
More than a fifth of all Trump condo sales were all-cash transactions by shell companies
https://www.curbed.com/2018/1/12/16885354/trump-condo-money-laundering-reporthttps://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-first-moscow-trip-215842https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868Your move.
Racket wrote:
Market right now is about as logical as Trump
There are investors who roll with the news. They panic then buy and sell based on their gut feel--like Trump. They are usually wrong--like Trump. They would do better to roll a pair of dice, or throw darts at a stock list; which are more logical than Trump-style investing.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
More than a fifth of all Trump condo sales were all-cash transactions by shell companies
https://www.curbed.com/2018/1/12/16885354/trump-condo-money-laundering-reporthttps://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-first-moscow-trip-215842https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868Your move.
Trump washed the cash throw his money laundry.
*through
Only Trump and Trump supporters keep using the word "collusion".
Classic straw man argument. They are creating a topic to argue about that really is not the topic at hand.
Muller is heading an investigation about outside interference in the 2016 election and following it to any leads that it takes it to.
There was strong evidence that there was Russian interference.
Several Russian nationalists have already been indicted on this.
Some Trump associates have been indicted on crimes that were discovered following these leads.
Trump is not under investigation for collusion (which is not even a crime).
There is a chance that the investigation may discover some cooperation and conspiracy with Trump and these Russian officials and money laundering may or may not get discovered in this process.
But there seems to be a case of obstruction of justice for the firing of James Comey for pursuing this investigation.
And if he offers pardons to entice people not to cooperate, that would be more counts of obstruction of justice.
With several trials yet to begin, the investigation must be allowed to continue uninterrupted.
Right On wrote:Don't be disingenuous, you know his indictment had nothing to do with the 2016 election.
It's already been shown he actively pursued altering policy while working for both Trump and whatever countries hired him.
And now you want to pretend that he would somehow make an exception for Russia.
What's the path of acceptance that Russian Statecraft was successful in the Trump campaign? Because it's inevitable.
Whether or not it ends up in the President being charged for anything is a whole other topic. And impeachment is currently very unlikely. So, you have that uncertainty to hang onto.
Do not lose faith in The Dear Leader!!
L L wrote:
Only Trump and Trump supporters keep using the word "collusion".
Classic straw man argument. They are creating a topic to argue about that really is not the topic at hand.
On top of which, the repetition reinforces a not-guilty perception of the Dear Leader. The Trumpbots have some clever people making this stuff up.
Right On wrote:
Manafort was a well-known lobbyist that had dealt with Russia/Ukraine/etc in the past. Don't be disingenuous, you know his indictment had nothing to do with the 2016 election.
WRONG. Manafort's original indictment was for earlier alleged crimes, but the additional charges (and those against Gates) included the election and 2017.
Mueller is here.
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
L L wrote:
Only Trump and Trump supporters keep using the word "collusion".
Classic straw man argument. They are creating a topic to argue about that really is not the topic at hand.
On top of which, the repetition reinforces a not-guilty perception of the Dear Leader. The Trumpbots have some clever people making this stuff up.
Yup, Sinclair Media was caught creating Fake News their TV anchors HAD TO air.
This what a typical Trumpster is like. This one, like certain LRC Trumpet Trolls, think Trump is "The Man."
How Trump is transforming himself into the greatest president ever
From the Washington Post. OpEd by Dana Milbank
Outgoing national security adviser H.R. McMaster, in a parting shot at President Trump, said this week that “we have failed to impose sufficient costs” on Russia — joining a consensus view that Trump has been inexplicably soft on Vladimir Putin’s assaults on democracy and stability.
But we can all stand down.
“Nobody has been tougher on Russia than I have,” Trump announced Tuesday afternoon.
Phew.
I felt similar relief when, even though he used anti-Semitic themes in his campaign and hesitated to condemn vandalism against Jewish targets, Trump informed us that “I am the least anti-Semitic person that you’ve ever seen in your entire life.”
I likewise was not troubled by Trump’s talk about “shithole” countries in Africa, or his defense of white supremacists in Charlottesville, because, as Trump assured us, “I am the least racist person you have ever interviewed.”
I don’t share the stock market’s jitters over the trade war Trump started, because I recall his assurance that “nobody knows more about trade than me.”
The allegations about his infidelity and his boasts about assaulting women are not troubling, because “nobody respects women more than I do,” and “nobody loves the Bible more than I do.”
The outrage about him mocking a disabled journalist on the campaign trail? Misplaced — because “nobody’s better to people with disabilities than me.”
You think he’s foul-mouthed and his insult-an-hour leadership is unpresidential? WRONG! “I have one of the great temperaments,” he said.
And on those occasions when Trump pits Americans against each other by race and ethnicity, fear not: “There’s nobody that’s done so much for equality as I have.”
Nobody! Take that, Frederick Douglass — though you’ve done an amazing job and I’m glad to see you are getting recognized more and more.
In rare moments of self-doubt, Trump admits he may not be quite as great as the Great Emancipator, but, he said, “with the exception of the late, great Abraham Lincoln, I can be more presidential than any president that’s ever held this office.”
It’s a signature Trump move: Don’t just deny the charge but declare yourself to be the polar opposite (while accusing your opponents of whatever you were accused of: You’re the puppet!). He can’t be a racist, or soft on Russia, or anything bad — because he’s the furthest possible thing from that.
It’s all terribly reassuring.
Trump’s biggest-and-greatest talk defines him, of course, and ranks him at the pinnacle of all human endeavors. His “I.Q. is one of the highest.” He has “the best words.” He is a “stable genius.” He has “one of the great memories of all time.” He was “always the best athlete.” His building makes “the best taco bowls.” He knows more about the Islamic State than the generals, and nobody “in the history of the world” knows more about taxes than Trump.
Some might quibble, saying his claim to be “the most militaristic person ever” is unfair to Genghis Khan, or that his claim that “nobody in the history of this country has ever known so much about infrastructure as Donald Trump” forgets the people who built the Panama Canal. But to point this out would be to further the historic persecution of Trump, victim of “the single greatest witch hunt of a politician in American history.” In fact, “no politician in history . . . has been treated worse or more unfairly.”
Instead, I resolve to be comforted by his superlatives, no matter how flagrantly they assault reality.
I was concerned about the flood of international criticism of Trump — until Trump said that he received “red carpet like I think probably nobody has ever received” in Asia, and that his speech in Poland “was the greatest speech ever made on foreign soil by a president.”
I worried about his cowboy talk of raining fire and fury on fat Rocket Man and his puny nuclear button, but I’m comforted to know that “there’s nobody that understands the horror of nuclear better than me.”
The rash of ethical scandals among Cabinet members was troubling, until I remembered that Trump’s Cabinet has “by far the highest IQ of any Cabinet ever.”
Trump’s tweets seem to show he’s unaware of policy details, so I’m relieved to discover that he understands legislation better “than any president that’s ever been in office.”
And despite figures showing Congress has ground to a halt, I’m delighted to learn that “never has there been a president . . . who’s passed more legislation,” except for Franklin D. Roosevelt.
In coming months, I expect Trump will usher in a new caravan of superlatives: Most faithful spouse in history. Least nepotistic person in America. Greatest gentleman in the world. Least susceptible to flattery. Most polite Twitter user. Least likely to watch cable news. And the humblest person — by far. He will be, in short, the greatest role model of all time.
Flagpole wrote:
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
LMAO. It's never gonna happen. This is epic flagpoling, indeed. 7 more years, brother!
Nope. You stay away when Trump goes on one of his crazy rants, either via twitter or in person, but then after a couple of days of silence or one measured speech, you are convinced that he will be able to reign it in and that all will be ok. Well, that's not going to happen. He has crossed a line, and things are lining up against him big time. He has ZERO chance of finishing his first term, and we will likely discover that he didn't fairly win the election proving that I was right about that too.
Good chance he won't make it 6 more months, but I'll put the range up to 2 years. He will resign before then.
The above post was from August 25, 2017.
Being stubborn is one thing. Being dumb is another. But being both is just... FLAGPOLE. LOL!
Count Chocula wrote:
Fake DHS University wrote:
DHS created a Trump-like Fake University to nab noncitizens. The nabbed an Army veteran who Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said could not be deported because of laws that allow veterans with honorable service to naturalize. The veteran obtained a fake visa given to him by the fake DHS University. He enlisted in the Army and completed training, and then DHS arrested him. Oh, and the fake DHS University took $8000 from him to enroll him in fake classes, and then claimed never attended the fake classes the reason for his arrest. You can not make up stuff like this, except in Trumpland.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2018/04/04/mattis-said-immigrant-veterans-should-not-be-deported-ice-is-trying-anyway/This is a pretty interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I do think it's worth pointing out that the fake university and arrest happened in 2016, before Trump was elected. Regardless, this looks to me like a situation where everyone involved bears a portion of the blame, and lack of communication between DHS and DoD resulted in ambiguous and confusing standards regarding who was covered by Mattis's statement.
Here is another story regarding severe government abuse. I is so bad that even a conservative like George Will was offended by the level of abuse by law enforcement.
WASHINGTON POST by George Will -- After two years of stonewalling about its theft of Gerardo Serrano's 2014 Ford F-250 pickup, the government suddenly returned it. It sparkled from having been washed and detailed, bumper to bumper, and it had four new tires and a new battery. The government probably hoped that, mollified by the truck's sprucing-up, Serrano would let bygones be bygones and go back to Kentucky. This was another mistake by our mistake-prone government.
Assisted by litigators from the Institute for Justice, whose appearance on the West Texas horizon probably panicked the government into pretending to be law-abiding, Serrano wants to make the government less larcenous and more constitutional when it is enriching itself through civil forfeiture.
On Sept. 21, 2015, Serrano drove up to the Eagle Pass, Texas, border crossing, intending to try to interest a Mexican cousin in expanding his solar panel installation business in the United States. To have mementos of his trip, he took some pictures of the border with his cellphone camera, which annoyed two U.S. Custom and Border Protection agents, who demanded the password to his phone. Serrano, who is what an American ought to be regarding his rights, prickly, refused to submit to such an unwarranted invasion of his privacy. One agent said he was "sick of hearing about your rights" and "you have no rights here." So, they searched his truck -- this was unusual for a vehicle leaving the country -- and one agent exclaimed, "We got him!"
Having found five .380-caliber bullets in the truck's center console -- he has a concealed-carry permit but had no weapon with him -- they handcuffed him and seized his truck under civil forfeiture, saying it had been used to transport "munitions of war." The next time someone warns about the potential for domestic abuse of supposed national security measures, do not dismiss him or her as a neurotic libertarian.
Civil forfeiture is the power to seize property suspected of being produced by, or involved in, crime. In this "Through the Looking-Glass," guilty-until-proven-innocent inversion, the property's owners bear the burden of proving that they were not involved in such activity, which can be a costly and protracted process as they must hire lawyers and do battle with a government wielding unlimited resources. Law enforcement agencies get to keep the profits from forfeited property, which gives them an incentive to do what too many of them do -- abuse the process. But, then, the process -- punishment before a crime is proven -- is inherently abusive.
The government seems mystified that Serrano will not leave bad enough alone, and drive away. It says he got his truck back after a mere 25 months, so "there is no longer any case or controversy." Serrano says, let me count the ways I have been injured by "thugs with badges."
Before the government would deign to promise (falsely, it turned out) to give him due process -- to allow him to request a judicial hearing -- it extorted from Serrano a bond of 10 percent of the truck's value ($3,804.99). The government quickly cashed his check (not until the IJ cavalry rode in did he get his money back). The hearing never happened. During the two years Serrano was without the truck, he had to continue making $672.97 monthly payments on it, and he had to pay more than $700 to insure it, $1,004.61 to register it in Kentucky and thousands more for rental cars.
Serrano is suing for restitution, but also seeking a class-action judgment on behalf of others who have been similarly mistreated. Just at Eagle Pass, one of 73 crossing points on the U.S.-Mexico border, the CBP seizes, on average, well more than 100 Americans' vehicles a year. Serrano seeks to establish a right to prompt post-seizure judicial hearings. These would be improvements, but of a process that requires radical revision, if not abolition.
Robert Everett Johnson is one of the IJ lawyers whose interest in the case galvanized the CBP's hitherto dormant interest in Serrano's rights. Johnson says: "Imagine being detained at an airport checkpoint because you innocently forgot to take a tube of toothpaste out of your luggage. But rather than asking you to throw it out or put it in a plastic bag, the TSA agents told you they were seizing all of your luggage, including the toothpaste tube." That happened to Serrano at the hands of a government -- the one north of the border -- that felt free to say, "You have no rights here."
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:
More than a fifth of all Trump condo sales were all-cash transactions by shell companies
https://www.curbed.com/2018/1/12/16885354/trump-condo-money-laundering-reporthttps://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/19/trump-first-moscow-trip-215842https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868Your move.
What crime has been committed by Trump and why has nothing been prosecuted? Do you know something no one else does?Also, this whole thing was supposed to be about "collusion", was it not? My how things seem to have changed.
You do realize that it takes a long time for this case to be built. Patience is a virtue, of which Trumpsters have none. Why do you support Donald Trump? How can you overlook sexism, misogyny, racism, etc.? It makes you a shi**y person.
qwerty squared wrote:
Right On wrote:
Manafort was a well-known lobbyist that had dealt with Russia/Ukraine/etc in the past. Don't be disingenuous, you know his indictment had nothing to do with the 2016 election.
WRONG. Manafort's original indictment was for earlier alleged crimes, but the additional charges (and those against Gates) included the election and 2017.
Mueller is here.
NO, you are WRONG. I posted Manafort's indictments below to this point. Please explain how they are related to the 2016 election (they aren't- see below, from Wikipedia- NOTHING is related to the election).
October 27, 2017- 5 counts: conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading FARA statements, and false statements. Pleaded not guilty on February 28, 2018.
February 22, 2018- 23 counts: assisting in the preparation of false tax returns (×5), subscribing to false tax returns (×5), filing a false amended return, failure to report foreign bank and financial accounts (×3), bank fraud conspiracy (×5), and bank fraud (×4). Pleaded not guilty on March 8, 2018.
"On October 30, 2017, Manafort surrendered to the FBI after being indicted by a federal grand jury as part of Robert Mueller's investigation into the Trump campaign. The indictment against Manafort and business associate Rick Gates was issued on October 27, 2017. The charges are: engaging in a conspiracy against the United States, engaging in a conspiracy to launder money, failing to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts, acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign principal, making false and misleading statements in documents filed and submitted under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and making false statements. According to the prosecutors, Manafort laundered more than $18 million. The charges are related to his consulting work for a pro-Russian government in Ukraine and do not cover any activities related to the 2016 Trump campaign.
Manafort and Gates pleaded not guilty to these charges at their court appearance on October 30, 2017. The US government asked the court to set Manafort’s bail at $10 million and Gates at $5 million. The court placed Manafort and Gates under house arrest after prosecutors described them as flight risks. If convicted on all charges Manafort could face decades in prison.
Following the hearing Manafort's attorney Kevin M. Downing made a public statement to the press proclaiming his client's innocence while describing the federal charges stemming from the indictment as “ridiculous”. Downing defended Manafort's decade-long lobbying effort for pro-Russian, former Ukrainian prime minister Viktor Yanukovych, describing their lucrative partnership as attempts to spread democracy and strengthen the relationship between the United States and Ukraine.[120] Judge Stewart responded by threatening to impose a gag order, saying "I expect counsel to do their talking in this courtroom and in their pleadings and not on the courthouse steps."
On November 30, 2017, Manafort's attorneys said that Manafort has reached a bail agreement with prosecutors that will free him from the house arrest he has been under since his indictment. He offered bail in the form of $11.65 million worth of real estate. The agreement still needs to be approved by the judge in the case. While out on bond, Paul Manafort worked on an op-ed with a "Russian who has ties to the Russian intelligence service", prosecutors said in a court filing requesting that the judge in the case revoke Manafort's bond agreement.
On January 3, 2018, Manafort filed a lawsuit challenging Mueller‘s broad authority and alleging the Justice Department violated the law in appointing Mueller. A spokesperson for the department replied that "The lawsuit is frivolous but the defendant is entitled to file whatever he wants". On January 12, Mueller asked U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson to set Manafort‘s trial date for May 14, 2018. On January 16, 2018, Jackson denied the government's date for trial indicating that the criminal trial appears likely to start in September at the earliest. Jackson revealed that a letter from Manafort's physician was submitted to the court, asking for changes in the conditions of Manafort's confinement. "While he's subject to home confinement, he's not confined to his couch, and I believe he has plenty of opportunity to exercise," Jackson said.
On February 2, 2018, the Department of Justice filed a motion seeking to dismiss the civil suit Manafort brought against Mueller.
On February 22, 2018, both Manafort and Gates were further charged with additional crimes involving a tax avoidance scheme and bank fraud in Virginia. The charges were filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, rather than in the District of Columbia, as the alleged tax fraud overt actions had occurred in Virginia and not in the District. The new indictment alleges that Manafort, with assistance from Gates, laundered over $30 million through offshore bank accounts between approximately 2006 and 2015. Manafort allegedly used funds in these offshore accounts to purchase real estate in the United States, in addition to personal goods and services.
On February 23, 2018, Gates pleaded guilty in federal court to lying to investigators and engaging in a conspiracy to defraud the United States. Through a spokesman, Manafort expressed disappointment in Gates’ decision to plead guilty and said he has no similar plans. “I continue to maintain my innocence,” he said.
On February 28, 2018, Manafort entered a not guilty plea in the District Court for the District of Columbia. Judge Jackson subsequently set a trial date of September 17, 2018, and reprimanded Manafort and his attorney for violating her gag order by issuing a statement the previous week after former co-defendant Gates pleaded guilty.[53] On March 8, 2018 Manafort also pleaded not guilty to bank fraud and tax charges in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia. Judge T. S. Ellis III of the Eastern District of Virginia set his trial on those charges to begin on July 10, 2018."
Here is another story wrote:
Count Chocula wrote:
This is a pretty interesting article. Thanks for posting it. I do think it's worth pointing out that the fake university and arrest happened in 2016, before Trump was elected. Regardless, this looks to me like a situation where everyone involved bears a portion of the blame, and lack of communication between DHS and DoD resulted in ambiguous and confusing standards regarding who was covered by Mattis's statement.
Here is another story regarding severe government abuse. I is so bad that even a conservative like George Will was offended by the level of abuse by law enforcement.
WASHINGTON POST by George Will -- After two years of stonewalling about its theft of Gerardo Serrano's 2014 Ford F-250 pickup, the government suddenly returned it. It sparkled from having been washed and detailed, bumper to bumper, and it had four new tires and a new battery. The government probably hoped that, mollified by the truck's sprucing-up, Serrano would let bygones be bygones and go back to Kentucky. This was another mistake by our mistake-prone government.
Assisted by litigators from the Institute for Justice, whose appearance on the West Texas horizon probably panicked the government into pretending to be law-abiding, Serrano wants to make the government less larcenous and more constitutional when it is enriching itself through civil forfeiture.
On Sept. 21, 2015, Serrano drove up to the Eagle Pass, Texas, border crossing, intending to try to interest a Mexican cousin in expanding his solar panel installation business in the United States. To have mementos of his trip, he took some pictures of the border with his cellphone camera, which annoyed two U.S. Custom and Border Protection agents, who demanded the password to his phone. Serrano, who is what an American ought to be regarding his rights, prickly, refused to submit to such an unwarranted invasion of his privacy. One agent said he was "sick of hearing about your rights" and "you have no rights here." So, they searched his truck -- this was unusual for a vehicle leaving the country -- and one agent exclaimed, "We got him!"
Having found five .380-caliber bullets in the truck's center console -- he has a concealed-carry permit but had no weapon with him -- they handcuffed him and seized his truck under civil forfeiture, saying it had been used to transport "munitions of war." The next time someone warns about the potential for domestic abuse of supposed national security measures, do not dismiss him or her as a neurotic libertarian.
Civil forfeiture is the power to seize property suspected of being produced by, or involved in, crime. In this "Through the Looking-Glass," guilty-until-proven-innocent inversion, the property's owners bear the burden of proving that they were not involved in such activity, which can be a costly and protracted process as they must hire lawyers and do battle with a government wielding unlimited resources. Law enforcement agencies get to keep the profits from forfeited property, which gives them an incentive to do what too many of them do -- abuse the process. But, then, the process -- punishment before a crime is proven -- is inherently abusive.
The government seems mystified that Serrano will not leave bad enough alone, and drive away. It says he got his truck back after a mere 25 months, so "there is no longer any case or controversy." Serrano says, let me count the ways I have been injured by "thugs with badges."
Before the government would deign to promise (falsely, it turned out) to give him due process -- to allow him to request a judicial hearing -- it extorted from Serrano a bond of 10 percent of the truck's value ($3,804.99). The government quickly cashed his check (not until the IJ cavalry rode in did he get his money back). The hearing never happened. During the two years Serrano was without the truck, he had to continue making $672.97 monthly payments on it, and he had to pay more than $700 to insure it, $1,004.61 to register it in Kentucky and thousands more for rental cars.
Serrano is suing for restitution, but also seeking a class-action judgment on behalf of others who have been similarly mistreated. Just at Eagle Pass, one of 73 crossing points on the U.S.-Mexico border, the CBP seizes, on average, well more than 100 Americans' vehicles a year. Serrano seeks to establish a right to prompt post-seizure judicial hearings. These would be improvements, but of a process that requires radical revision, if not abolition.
Robert Everett Johnson is one of the IJ lawyers whose interest in the case galvanized the CBP's hitherto dormant interest in Serrano's rights. Johnson says: "Imagine being detained at an airport checkpoint because you innocently forgot to take a tube of toothpaste out of your luggage. But rather than asking you to throw it out or put it in a plastic bag, the TSA agents told you they were seizing all of your luggage, including the toothpaste tube." That happened to Serrano at the hands of a government -- the one north of the border -- that felt free to say, "You have no rights here."
Indeed, another interesting article. Thanks for posting. On the one hand, border security is an important issue and law enforcement agents probably feel that their ability to do their job is restricted in comparison to those who break the law. On the other hand, Americans have rights that must be respected, and I would like to see law enforcement work without violating civil liberties, even if that means being less effective at their job.