scourge165

Do you know what happen to Epstien's plane? The imfamous plane everyone talks about, the one we now know Trump flew on numerous times? Yeah, that's the plane Trump bought. Or his campaign. He's owned that for a while. And anyone ever think it was weird how it was Obama or the Clintons that had him killed...while he was in the criminal justice system under the TRUMP administration. Trump wishing Epstein's Pimp "all the best," after claiming he didn't know her. Countless pics of them together. I don't get why people think HE is the one unlikely to be on there. He's yelled out to 12 year old girls, "I'll be dating her in 10 years." He "inspects" Mrs Teen USA because 'when you own it, you can do that.'

No, definitely something positive to be found here. Trump was doing something "catastrophically stupid," to quote Tomas Sowell. He stopped doing that stupid thing. But lets not pretend like it was a smart move because the thing he did was SO bad it caused a historic drop and we regained about MOST of that. Also, Trump was touting how bad the tariffs were going to be before they hit. Now I don't want to relitigate the whole Smoot-Hawley thing, but when you announce massive tariffs and you say all industries are going to get hit, you hit your neighbors, you go after every ally(except Russia?)...it's really not accurate to go from the 2nd to today...but even doing just that, we're still down. And a lot of people really did lose a lot of money. Just hypothetically. I have 5000 shares of NVDA. It's trading around 125 because...it's a great company. And then you hear specifically they're going to put tariffs on every country and they're going to tariff that specific thing that one company makes. I think it's fair to go from the ~145 it was before, after he did this and then thing about the people who aren't in their 30s and able to hold and wait it out because that's their retirement and they're on a fixed income...so now they sell it at...95-100 as Trump is saying, this is going to cause pain, but we'll be better on the other side, but even the Republicans are talking about passing bills saying 'we need to take back the authority to put tariffs on a President.' It's pretty bad for them. My old man came VERY close to doing exactly that(in fact, he did tell me to, but...I ignored him or he wouldn't own any NVDA at all, but still).

Wait...so if the Nasdaq dumps 15 points because of your stupid policy and then regains 10 points, you're up 10 points in your world? It's up 1900 today. It's STILL down ~2900 since Trump came in with his tariff talk and down ~600 points from before this whole mess started.

Oh please. Is this a new Twitter talking point that everyone's repeating? I saw someone quote Jimmy saying this. There were NEVER 70 Countries who didn't already HAVE fair trade. There was one major one...that was a concern to us. To put a finer point on it, there are three main Countries who don't really have fair trade or take advantage of other countries/the rules. 1-'GYNA 2-Brazil 3-....The United States. The first and most obvious example would be these tariffs on a newly agreed upon trade deal that our two partners had agreed to. We're kinda pricks as well...billions of people who thought their economy was going into the toilet because of our actions will attest to this. Brazil really just has high tariffs for cars. There are others who are worse but...not really relevant. North Korea isn't a bastion of free trade(or free anything). But lets operate under this assumption that we just wanted to see. We wanted to see who was with us and who'd side with China. PLEASE tell me what happens if India, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam all would have agreed to overtures from China to stand against the US? The EU is not happy with us. Canada, Mexico...we screwed with ALL of our allies and now we claim victory because...we know who'll negotiate? I'm VERY happy he put an end to this, but there are a LOT of people who have big tax bills due who took out taxes, who are paying penalties for doing so or who sold lower because we still have another 20-25% to go yet if he hadn't stopped. You don't get credit for taking a bus hostage to get at one person, and then releasing that Bus minus that one person. https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/herit_trade_freedom/

LOL...still, it's just amusing. No matter how many people said it was stupid at the time...and the rights favorite in Sowell call it moronic, they are libs or why should we care. He cleans SOME of the *I poop my pants, don't laugh at me* he stepped in off his shoes and it's "wow, that's brilliant!

The system is VERY much built to catch fraud. They went and audited the votes how many times and there were like 3 illgal votes. A Trumper who voted by mail for his dead Mother in Law, a women in TX who was days within being off probation and told it was legal to vote and then a 3rd Trump voter who tried to vote in multiple states because...Trump literally told them to. The oddities are not worth talking about. Just look at the stupidity with the Spanish Flu. 2 seconds. Over by the election. Not a tightly contested election(26 point win). "People saw stuff," was another argument. And they were heard and it was nonsense. But the part in bold. Basically if he loses, but HE believes he won(we now know he KNEW he did not win, Bill Barr, Sidney Powell among others were crystal clear on that point)....but if he loses and the LAW doesn't work, what else is he supposed to do but cheat?

That's a lie, they have absolutely NO authority to be there. The States Certified the vote, THAT is why they're being prosecuted now... Actually...I realize now how easy this is. It's why jross comes off as a pseudo intellectually but then asks about the voter turnout in an election that was 60-34% and AFTER the Spanish Flu was considered over! It was illegal for Donald Trump and his allies to attempt to create and submit a second slate of electors on January 6, 2021, for several key reasons rooted in U.S. law, particularly the U.S. Constitution and federal statutes governing the election process. Here’s why: 1. No Legal Basis for Alternate Electors The U.S. Constitution and federal laws clearly outline how the Electoral College works, including how electors are selected and certified. The legitimate electors for each state are chosen through the state’s electoral process, based on the popular vote (except in rare circumstances where the state legislature might step in to choose electors, which did not occur in 2020). The problem with the second slate of electors is that it had no legal basis. These alternate electors were chosen without any legal authority or support from state legislatures, and they did not reflect the results of the actual election. The electors Trump’s allies tried to create were intended to falsely claim that Trump had won states where Joe Biden was the legitimate winner. This was a direct attempt to circumvent the lawful process. 2. Electoral Count Act of 1887 The Electoral Count Act of 1887 establishes the procedure for counting and certifying electoral votes. According to this law, electors must be chosen in accordance with the laws of each state, and those electors must then meet and send their votes to Congress. There is no provision in this law for creating alternate slates of electors, especially when those electors do not reflect the results of the election. The idea behind creating a fake set of electors was that if the legitimate electors could be rejected, the alternate slate might be used instead, allowing Trump to have a chance to win. However, the Electoral Count Act does not allow for this kind of manipulation. The law only provides for the rejection of electors under very limited circumstances (such as if they were determined to have been illegally chosen or invalidated), but the alternate slates created by Trump’s allies were not legitimate electors under the law. 3. Violation of the Certification Process The certification of electoral votes is a solemn, constitutionally mandated process. Under the 12th Amendment, once the electors’ votes are cast and sent to Congress, the Vice President (in his role as President of the Senate) opens and counts those votes. Congress may object to specific votes or states, but the process is designed to be a ceremonial one, and only in the case of legitimate issues (such as clear fraud or error in the election process) could votes be excluded. Trump and his allies' efforts to have an alternate slate of electors was an attempt to create a fraudulent challenge to the certification process. The attempt to replace legitimate electors with fraudulent ones was a direct attempt to undermine the proper constitutional process. Such actions are seen as a violation of the law because they subverted the election process and sought to interfere with the lawful certification of the election results. 4. Potential Charges and Legal Implications By trying to create a false set of electors, Trump and his allies were involved in a scheme to defraud the public and the U.S. government. In legal terms, this could amount to conspiracy to defraud the United States under federal statutes. The key issue is that the alternate electors were attempting to falsely present themselves as the legitimate electors, with the goal of subverting the lawful results of the election. Creating fraudulent certificates and attempting to have them submitted to Congress (and potentially used in place of legitimate electors) is a crime under various laws, including those prohibiting the use of false documents or false statements in a federal election. The fraudulent electors did not represent the true will of the voters in those states and were an attempt to illegally alter the outcome of the election. 5. The Role of the Vice President Another key point is that Vice President Mike Pence had no legal authority to reject the legitimate electors and choose the fake ones in their place. The idea behind the alternate slates was that Pence could use them to refuse to certify the legitimate election results on January 6. However, as Pence repeatedly stated, his role was strictly ceremonial, and he did not have the authority to unilaterally change the results of the election. Any attempt to force him to do so would have been a violation of his constitutional duty. Conclusion: In summary, the creation of alternate electors on January 6, 2021, was illegal because it was an attempt to falsely present a different outcome than the one determined by the lawful and legitimate electoral process. The move violated both the U.S. Constitution and the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which governs the process of certifying electoral votes. The scheme was designed to subvert the democratic process and undermine the certification of the election results, which is illegal under U.S. law.

LOL..."a self inflicted nuclear winter, this is not what we voted for." That's what he said about the tariffs. Trump realizes how badly they're failing and it's "oh, wow, that was so smart! Even you Jimmy...no way you're that dumb....

This is genuinely moronic. Trump Tweeted out about "crashes" 20 some times in the last 12 months. And he did it when things happened that were absolutely no fault of the Biden Admin. The Aug 5th Yen Carry trade and things like that. They didn't "stir up a panic," that "never came." He had the worst performance in the SPX ever. We entered crash level in every index and for no good reason. To pretend HE'S owed an apology for NOT continuing to do all the dumb things he was doing, but...it was dumb.

This was still VERY bad on balance. Lets not pretend this did anything. We're happy now because he UN-Screwed the situation.

Yeah... but this is better than where I was. I'm going to stay about 30% in cash until next year or more guarantees, but I'm just thrilled that the economy isn't dumping.

You're right about the Trump part with Canada and...everyone else. But it's not China's tariffs that are the issue(they're just not that high). It's them stealing intellectual property which they regularly do. It's hacking and corporate espionage. Guarantee they have people at Nvidia, AMD, AVGO and every other field. It's the currency manipulation, it's NEVER been the tariffs. If it was tariffs, I think Brazil would be your primary target. And companies have moved from China to Vietnam or other Asian Nations. I have a feeling the market is going to go back down after we get some clarity on the exact tariffs that were suspended. But no, 2.2% tariff rate for China. That's not the problem at all with China.

Yeah...predatory is a nice way of putting it, but of course it was beyond stupid to put them on the rest of the world. That's unquestionable.

Yeah...am I letting him off the hook a bit? OFC. This was SO stupid...but this was clearly leading to a-best case scenario- 6-12 month recession, inflation and higher unemployment. It did enough damage, but...it made no sense EVER to go after so many allies and POTENTIALLY turn them into Chinese allies. Trump got out of this and he got lucky to do so(though...other countries do need us more).

C'mon...this was NOT a dead cat bounce. This was people diving over themselves to get back into the market. I don't know how to quantify it, but how about stolen IP from META to make ChatCCP? China is corrupt, they are not a free/fair trading partner. They do only charge 2.2 effective tax rate, but they do a LOT of underhanded things. This is good news. We didn't WANT a crash. Trump screwed up but he got lucky, got out before doing too much damage and...here we are.

No...that cat is dead. This is a new cat. He's not in great shape, little scared...but he's in MUCH better shape than the last cat. If he plays this right, China has to make some concessions. They are not a corrupt trade partner. Oh...dang, we got lucky. Trump did the right thing...at this point, but...we got lucky. If India fires back or Japan and SK, we can't un-ring that bell. It still sucks. I got pretty lucky but a lot of retirees cashed out and they'll have to pay massive fees and we still have tariffs, but...still, move in the right direction. I think we learned that TRUMP learned...trade wars don't work. Going after China, that can work(though...we do still need them).

Yeah...it was beautiful. He almost completely reversed course and now....hopefully, in 3 months, the trade deals we have will put more pressure on China(who was pressuring India...and I said it all in the post, but all of Asia could have turned to them). We got out of a bad deal and while there are still some tariffs in place...things are definitely moving in the right direction.

No, he said he wanted Tariffs to be permanent. He long held this belief that tariffs were the way to pay down the debt. This was a good thing he did today. This wasn't a brilliant masterstroke that he thought out. The 10 year yield, I think the MAIN reason he's doing this now was UP 70 basis points. So that's 70B more we pay the next 10 years because of this(if that would have held)...and it was too risk to get...nothing out of it BUT less losses than we anticipated. I appreciate he recognized it was a failure and we were headed toward a recession, but he said dozens of times the tariffs wlil make us so rich, and then people started to say "he's actually been saying this since the 1970s, we should go back to tariffs," even once floating eliminating the income tax. Also, we do still have tariffs that don't make sense in place. So I think it was...at BEST him admitting it wasn't working and using the other countries offers as a talking point.

On top of the AI that you love, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY AUTHORITY TO ASK FOR A DELAY. They were the LEGAL electors and it was Jan 6th. "A week to 10 days." This is AFTER Trump wouldn't cooperate with the transition team(Which Obama and Biden did with Trump). You are consistent in your consistently wrong. As for Smoot-Hawley, argue with Reagan or Sowell, I'm done with that. The plan to get "alternate" slates of electors to sign certificates declaring that Donald Trump won key battleground states in the 2020 election was part of a broader strategy aimed at overturning the results of the election, despite Joe Biden's clear victory. This plan, often referred to as the "fake electors" scheme, was devised by Trump’s allies to create an alternate set of electors that could be used in an effort to pressure Vice President Mike Pence to reject the legitimate electors during the certification process on January 6, 2021. Here’s a breakdown of how it was supposed to work: 1. Creation of "Alternate" Electors Trump's allies in key battleground states (like Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) sought to have "alternate" slates of electors selected and submitted. These electors would be made up of people loyal to Trump, instead of those who had been legitimately chosen through the election process (who were pledged to Joe Biden). The idea was that these alternate slates would declare that Trump had actually won the state, even though Biden had won both the popular vote and the electoral vote in those states. 2. Pressure on State Legislatures and Local Officials In some states, Trump’s allies attempted to convince state legislators or Republican Party officials to certify and submit the alternate slates. They argued that the election had been "stolen" and that the legitimate election results should not be recognized, despite no evidence of widespread fraud. In other states, these alternate electors were simply asked to meet in state capitals and submit fraudulent certificates claiming Trump won. 3. Use of Fake Electors in the Certification Process The ultimate goal of the fake electors was to create confusion during the certification of the Electoral College votes in Congress on January 6, 2021. If Trump’s allies could present these alternate slates of electors, they hoped it would give Vice President Pence a reason to reject the legitimate electors and potentially allow the Trump team to claim victory. The plan involved submitting the fake electors' certificates to Congress, despite them having no legal standing. 4. The Role of Vice President Pence The fake electors were intended to create a pretext for Vice President Mike Pence to delay or reject the certification of Biden's electoral victory. Trump's allies argued that Pence, as President of the Senate, could use the alternate electors to refuse to count the legitimate electoral votes from contested states. Pence, however, stated that he did not believe he had the constitutional authority to reject certified electors, and he refused to comply with this plan. 5. Legal Implications The creation of alternate electors was widely regarded as an attempt to subvert the democratic process. In some cases, the certificates submitted by these fake electors were fraudulent, and the scheme raised concerns about election interference, conspiracy, and potential violations of federal election laws. The individuals involved in this scheme could face legal consequences, including charges of fraud or obstruction. 6. The Public and Legal Fallout The scheme to create fake electors was exposed publicly and drew significant criticism from both legal experts and politicians. Many viewed it as an undemocratic attempt to manipulate the certification process and undermine the will of the voters. In subsequent legal investigations, including congressional hearings and criminal inquiries, the involvement of Trump’s allies in the fake elector scheme became a focal point. The plan ultimately failed, but it remains a key part of the broader narrative surrounding efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. In essence, the fake electors plan was a coordinated effort by Trump’s allies to undermine the legitimate election outcome by attempting to replace Biden’s electors with pro-Trump electors in contested states. This was a crucial part of the broader strategy to prevent Joe Biden's victory from being certified, and it became one of the key aspects of the investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

Donald Trump asked Vice President Mike Pence to refuse to certify the results of the 2020 Presidential Election on January 6, 2021, which many legal experts believe would have been illegal for several reasons. The Constitution's Role of the Vice President: The U.S. Constitution grants the Vice President a ceremonial role in the certification of Electoral College results. In the 12th Amendment, the Vice President is described as the President of the Senate and has the responsibility to open and count the electoral votes. However, this role does not give the Vice President the power to alter or reject the results. The Constitution does not provide for the Vice President to make decisions about the legitimacy of votes or to overturn the outcome of the election. No Legal Authority to Reject Electoral Votes: Trump's request for Pence to refuse to certify certain electoral votes, particularly from battleground states where Trump claimed there was fraud, was based on the argument that Pence could unilaterally decide which electoral votes should be counted. However, there is no legal or constitutional basis for this claim. The Vice President's role is purely procedural and does not allow for independent action to reject votes or delay certification without a clear and legitimate reason. Violation of the Electoral Count Act: The Electoral Count Act of 1887 sets forth a process for certifying electoral votes, and it does not give the Vice President the power to arbitrarily reject votes or prevent the certification process. Trump's pressure on Pence to not certify the election results was seen as an attempt to undermine this process and interfere with the law, which is what the act was designed to prevent. Potential Violation of Federal Laws: Trump's actions were also examined under federal laws that prohibit interference with elections and the certification process. Legal experts have considered whether Trump's actions amounted to attempting to incite or coerce a public official (Pence) to violate his duties. That could fall under statutes like those related to conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, or attempting to alter the outcome of an election through improper means. In essence, what Trump asked Pence to do was seen as illegal because it attempted to subvert the lawful process of certifying the election results, which is a key part of upholding the integrity of U.S. elections. The Vice President had no legal authority to reject electoral votes, and by trying to convince Pence to take such an action, Trump was pushing for a constitutional violation.

No...just...I don't know. Maybe keep your powder dry or...BRK.B? I wouldn't trust him, but...meh.

Sure...it's...kinda like the guy robbing the bank, taking people hostage and then giving himself up, BUT...that last act was great! And we could, as I said, come out of this, let cooler heads prevail and get a better deal with China or build our own alliance with China. We did need to crack down on them. This is a huge relief though.

Yeah...FOOK China. They HAVE it coming. They are corrupt, manipulate currency, steal intellectual property, corporate espionage. WE NEEDED to crack down on China. I'm good with that...with all due respect, this is a good thing. When he did this, it was hurting people. It still caused damage and we'll see how that comes back, but...this was GOOD. I will bet we come out of this with trade deals and a LOT more barrels pointing at China(who we do still need). And we both said, it was stupid to go after China and THE WORLD at once time, right? So...this was good.

Still don't get it's LESS about the storming the Capital and MUCH-MUCH more about how Trump was ONE person...one person complicit in his plan away from installing himself as POTUS? That's all it took. For Pence to do the wrong thing and choose the illegitimate slate of electors. If you don't get how THAT was the threat...and the rest while disgusting at our Nations Capital, but not the threat Trump was and how close the guardrails came that day...then you're not going to get it.

Dude...this is an objectively good thing. We're STILL hitting China...who just stole IP from META and this could stop a recession that hurts people. He's a clown...but he's a clown who just did the right thing.