Trump being investigated for possible obstruction of justice - Washington Post

[Rob13]

14 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

People are losing their cover anyway as companies pull out, and many can't afford it.

 

Check your facts, they're pulling out because of the uncertainties brought on by trump's upheaval of the system. The market has become too unstable driving costs up. All trump's efforts have accomplished is market chaos.  It's worse now than it was before. 

[ilostmypassword]

11 minutes ago, Traveler19491 said:

Your willful ignorance regarding these matters is appalling.

Banks can and do plunder at will. Are you aware of how money is created? When you deposit one dollar in any bank, that bank is immediately permitted to literally create lend $10. Where did that $10 come from? Thin air. Literally.

"The credit markets have become a funnel for money distribution. However, in a fractional reserve banking system, new loans actually create even more new money. With a legally required reserve ratio of 10%, the new $100 billion in bank reserves could potentially result in a nominal monetary increase of $1 trillion." (Investopedia.com)

Your assertion that "Banks can't plunder anything without people giving them their money - buyer beware" is indicative of a pathetically poor understanding of how economics, the Federal Reserve, investments, and banking work. Banks don't need depositors per se. They need the Federal Reserve and borrowers. That's all. And with the money that is created by their borrowing from the Fed, they can then turn around and play with that money in the markets, putting that money into high-risk investments (like mortgages given to people who can't afford them, or exotic instruments that have high yields but also astronomical risks. Sound familiar?)

Your ludicrous assertion that "Banks can't plunder without people giving them their money - buyer beware") reveals a gross lack of knowledge/understanding about how banks, the Federal Reserve, investments, and money all work. Please try to gain at least a modicum of understanding about a subject before trying to make an intelligent sounding remark. It doesn't do you justice.

There is nothing inherent about a fractional-reserve system that leads to abuses. It's now a question of regulation. Dodd-Frank went a long way towards stopping those abuse you describe. Now Trump and the Republicans want to undo them.

[ilostmypassword]

14 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps you should look at what is happening with Obamacare in the real world. People are losing their cover anyway as companies pull out, and many can't afford it. Obama care was doomed, but some don't or won't accept reality.

Banks can't plunder anything without people giving them their money- buyer beware.

Climate change regulations didn't do anything to stop/ reverse climate change, and people can stop driving cars or flying in planes without the government telling them to.

Obama nearly doubled the debt in his 8 years.

 

Trump is a joke, but he is the president and she isn't. Job done.

And of course your reply takes no account of the huge success of the Medicaid expansion in those state that chose to avail themselves of it.  Generally speaking those states also do better in the exchanges because poorer people have somewhere else to go for insurance

 

Make a real hard effort to understand that what the Republicans are proposing is really not health care reform but a huge tax reduction for the wealthiest Americans.

Edited June 17, 2017 by ilostmypassword

[Rob13]

  A conservative republican approach to business is to stabilize the markets and make things conducive for businesses to make money. Especially big business. What trump has done is the opposite. Anybody claiming support for trump because he's a conservative republican doesn't understand the GOP platform. 

 

 

[Ramen087]

That's a new take on how to bash Trump. Thank you for the creative content.  

[Peterw42]

So we started with a very broad, non partisan, investigation into Russian interference, part of this investigation was "who was Russia talking to"

Trump then makes a stupid tweet about Obama was tapping his phones (that he got from fox news).

This comment steered the investigation in to looking into collusion.

Trump sacks Comey who was running the in investigation.

This steers the investigation to look at obstruction of justice.

 

Trump keeps redirecting the bus, but ultimately doesn't like where the bus ends up.

[boomerangutang]

                                     There are bigger trees to fall on Trump than Obstruction of Justice charges.  

 

                             Does anyone wonder why Trump is so thoroughly spooked?   He is now subject to open-ended investigations into ALL his law-breaking.   Start watching the following video at minute 16 , and you'll see how Trump's mafia connections will catch up to him, and his (and Kushner's) money empire will crumble like a skyscraper made of mud bricks with no re-bar.....

 

 

[smotherb]

17 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

I don't want Russia or America to manipulate my country.  In fact, if I had to choose between the 2... America would be bottom of the list.

Well want in one hand and defecate in the other and see which gets full first.

 

That may be your opinion; however, as an American, I see it the other way around.

[boomerangutang]

                            I dusted off my crystal ball and stared into it (ok, I was a bit groggy and cross-eyed), and saw Trump and some of his family relocating to a residence outside the US within the next 6 years.  With all the headlines, day by day, about Trump's law-breaking (alleged, or otherwise), it's doubtful he can reside anywhere in the US without being hassled by protesters, as well as the long arm of US federal law.   

 

                        He will be like OJ - everywhere he goes outside of his walled compound, he will have people shouting insults at him.

 

                       He probably won't slink away to the former USSR, nor his bosom buddies in Saudi Arabia.  More likely, it will be somewhere in the Caribbean, which would include Belize (Ambergis Cay, for example), or he could get one of his Russian buddies to buy him his own island.   I can't imagine what he'd call it.  

[Traveler19491]

9 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

                                     There are bigger trees to fall on Trump than Obstruction of Justice charges.  

 

                             Does anyone wonder why Trump is so thoroughly spooked?   He is now subject to open-ended investigations into ALL his law-breaking.   Start watching the following video at minute 16 , and you'll see how Trump's mafia connections will catch up to him, and his (and Kushner's) money empire will crumble like a skyscraper made of mud bricks with no re-bar.....

 

 

Thanks for posting that. This is what I've been alluding to for a long time...Trump's illegal activities are vastly more involved than just obstruction of justice or colluding with the Russians. While the Special Counsel may have a problem proving either of those (although I doubt that), Trump's financial irregularities have been going on for decades, and he has never had a problem climbing into bed with criminals (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/donald-trump-lies-about-dealings-mafia-figures/). This is why the orange one is having a total meltdown...his greatest fear is being realized and there's little he can do about it. Even if he fires everyone he has to in order to get Mueller fired, his problems won't go away. Taking that course will just exacerbate his situation and prompt calls for an even deeper, wider investigation. It's precisely these types of things that cause me to believe that he is fast becoming so toxic to the GOP that they will oust him using the 25th Amendment with a promise of a pardon from Pence. The thing for the Republicans, though, is that they are in a no-win situation. Continued stonewalling and refusal to go along with the investigation will just come back to bite them hard in 2018. But going along with the investigation will hurt them with the Trump lovers in 2018, with those who do turn on Trump being threatened with being "primaried". Not a good time to be a Republican. But then, lay down with a dog, wake up with fleas.

[smotherb]

15 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems that Comey was indeed a clever chap. Trump should remember not to insult people that can make his life harder, but then he wouldn't be "Trump", would he? 

I guess people like I have to put up with the less attractive aspects of his personality as the price for keeping HRC out of the big chair.

I am not sure Trump is capable of knowing clever. The sorry fact that our two major political parties left us with such poor choices for president is indeed a blight on America. However, I am even more concerned at the spoiled little rich kid we have. He seems to be  incapable of learning how government functions and still wants his way. You mention the less attractive aspects of his presidency--of which I now see little else--combined with the fact that he was perceived as the lesser of two evils by many of his supporters; leaves us with little choice--get rid of the clown. 

 

 

[boomerangutang]

1 minute ago, tomwct said:

What a bunch of crap! The Lefties are praying something will stick against the President but it will never happen! This is more Fake News and that's all we get from the lame Duck Media! Go President Trump. Continue Making America Great Again! 7 1/2 more 

years to fundamentally change America to it's former Greatness!

How can you claim "it will never happen"   ?

 

If there is law-breaking, wouldn't you want to know who did what? .....and the guilty person be fined/incarcerated/punished?

 

If a 37 yr old man is hanging out at a high school at 4 pm, and follows girls walking home, and rapes them, wouldn't you want the culprit brought to trial and, if found guilty, sentenced accordingly?

 

Law-breaking is law-breaking. Trump and his inner circle are being investigated on several levels.  Is that troublesome for you?   Would you rather have persistent law-breakers occupying the Oval Office?   I wouldn't.

[mikebike]

20 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

How can he prove a negative when so many are running around saying because they said he did it, it must be true?

You mean like OJ's lawyers did?

[Scott]

A comment referring to the story as fake news has been removed along with a reply.   You are welcome to agree with an OP and to express your skepticism, however calling something fake news when it is not will result in a suspension.

 

Fake news is news that is made up and is not true.   Unless you have a link that proves that the story is made, be very careful about what you post.   

 

Disagreeing with the investigation is certainly permissible, but it is not fake and such statements are trolling and false.  

[selftaopath]

2 hours ago, Traveler19491 said:

Aaaaaand once again, you have swallowed an overly generous portion of Trump's bovine fecal matter. Obamacare is not "failing", as the orange one and his minions would love you to believe. Trump and the GOP are sabotaging it.

1) Companies pulling out of state exchanges leaving no coverage available. While this is true in a very few cases, most state exchanges are stable.

2) Huge premium increases. This is primarily due to Trump and the Republicans introducing completely unwarranted instability into the marketplace by refusing to indicate whether tax subsidies will be continued. If tax subsidies are terminated, participation in the individual marketplace will drop dramatically, thereby shrinking the pool of younger insureds who account for most of the insurance companies profits. Companies are pricing that risk into their premiums.

3) Enrollments in the ACA have been good, this year exceeding expectations. That is largely due to the government's aggressive campaign of promoting the program. However, one of Trump's first actions was to eliminate all funding for promotion, the intent being to curtail enrollments and thus fulfill his prophecy that the ACA is "failing".

4) Trump seeks to eliminate the requirement for everyone to have insurance. That will lead to healthy young people declining to enroll, thus starving insurance companies of the needed healthy people to offset the claims by older, less healthy participants and therefore driving rates up, or companies pulling out altogether.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/trump-sabotaging-obamacare/521256/

 

All of this is nothing less than a callous effort to inflict a death-by-a-thousand-cuts on Obamacare. The program has many faults, but none that can't be corrected. Whatever the GOP comes up with will more than likely prove to be disastrous for the poor, sick, and elderly, as the House's initial effort so adequately demonstrated. If the Senate version is going to be so good, then why is it being crafted in secret? Why is the public, all of whom will be affected by whatever they do, not being allowed to observe the process? Why is the public not being given every assurance that pre-existing conditions will be covered, that lifetime caps will not be permitted, that profit margins will not be capped, and that subsidies will be continued?

 

Why? Because that would preclude their ability to fork over huge tax breaks to the wealthy. Those provisions are exactly what the GOP intends to use to fund those tax cuts, and the poor, sick, and elderly will be the ones required to pay for it. Your continued slavish adulation of the orange one is keeping you from seeing what he and his GOP sycophants are doing to real people.

Thank you Traveler. I'd guess you have much more patience than I i.e. explaining this to the ones who remain in the dark - by their own choosing. Wouldn't it be shocking if they knew a bit a/b what is taking place and not some talking points the RussiaReps and team 45/Putin put out?

 

Enjoy your posts.

[Traveler19491]

23 minutes ago, tomwct said:

What a bunch of crap! The Lefties are praying something will stick against the President but it will never happen! This is more Fake News and that's all we get from the lame Duck Media! Go President Trump. Continue Making America Great Again! 7 1/2 more 

years to fundamentally change America to it's former Greatness!

I wholeheartedly concur! Let's restore America to it's zenith of greatness! The era following WWII, when America had the finest education system in the world, when American business successes were studied by every other industrialized nation, when foreign students invariably wanted to come to the US to study, when America was the model that the rest of the world strove to emulate, when a single-income household could afford to buy a new house, buy a new car, pay for their kids' college, take a vacation, and still save for retirement...all on that one income. Let's go back there as quickly as we can!!!

Oh, one other thing...it was also a time when the highest personal tax bracket was 91% on incomes over $400,000, when the corporate tax rate was 50% on profits over $25,000, when union membership was at its highest, when the minimum wage was liveable, when a CEO's income was only 20 times higher than the average employee compared to 347 times higher last year.

I was also a time when, if you weren't a member of a union, you could be fired for any reason whatsoever. If you were injured on the job (due to there being few workplace safety regulations) you likely wouldn't get any compensation. You could be fired a week before qualifying for your pension, and there would be nothing you could do about it. Black people were still being lynched. Your boss could get rid of you if he didn't like your politics.

 

This is why the cry to "Make America Great Again" is nothing more than a catchy sounding cluster of meaningless words. You don't have the first idea what you're talking about. You can't define what making America "great" would entail. Come back when you can post something that makes sense.

 

[PattayaJames]

You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?

 

Is there a link citing anything more than unidentified officials, or is it just a case of It was in the WP so it must be true?

 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein warns against anonymous sources

 

Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country – let alone the branch of agency of government – with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/15/deputy-attorney-general-rod-rosenstein-warns-against-anonymous-sources/102907698/

[ilostmypassword]

Well, 

1 minute ago, PattayaJames said:

You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?

 

Is there a link citing anything more than unidentified officials, or is it just a case of It was in the WP so it must be true?

 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein warns against anonymous sources

 

Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country – let alone the branch of agency of government – with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/15/deputy-attorney-general-rod-rosenstein-warns-against-anonymous-sources/102907698/

"You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?"

You've got a point. And I would agree with you except for words of this one individual who seems to disagree with you. His name is Donald Trump.

Trump acknowledges he is under investigation in Russia probe

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump acknowledged on Friday he is under investigation in a probe of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential race and possible collusion by his campaign - and seemed to assail the Justice Department official overseeing the inquiry.

 

Robert Mueller, the special counsel named by the department to investigate the Russia matter, is now examining whether Trump or others sought to obstruct the probe, a person familiar with the inquiry said on Thursday.

 

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt," Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to his May 9 dismissal of James Comey.

 

https://www.apnews.com/0172a576e8124251b5478818d1944632

 

 

What makes your comment especially gratifying is what I wrote in the thread about this article, that I was surprised that Trumpistas hadn't rushed to condemn trump for being another liar about the investigation.  Apparently, you must believe that he has joined the ranks of the Resistance.  And I agree with you about him. At least insofar as he is a liar. Thank you so much.

 

 

[selftaopath]

10 minutes ago, Traveler19491 said:

I wholeheartedly concur! Let's restore America to it's zenith of greatness! The era following WWII, when America had the finest education system in the world, when American business successes were studied by every other industrialized nation, when foreign students invariably wanted to come to the US to study, when America was the model that the rest of the world strove to emulate, when a single-income household could afford to buy a new house, buy a new car, pay for their kids' college, take a vacation, and still save for retirement...all on that one income. Let's go back there as quickly as we can!!!

Oh, one other thing...it was also a time when the highest personal tax bracket was 91% on incomes over $400,000, when the corporate tax rate was 50% on profits over $25,000, when union membership was at its highest, when the minimum wage was liveable, when a CEO's income was only 20 times higher than the average employee compared to 347 times higher last year.

I was also a time when, if you weren't a member of a union, you could be fired for any reason whatsoever. If you were injured on the job (due to there being few workplace safety regulations) you likely wouldn't get any compensation. You could be fired a week before qualifying for your pension, and there would be nothing you could do about it. Black people were still being lynched. Your boss could get rid of you if he didn't like your politics.

 

This is why the cry to "Make America Great Again" is nothing more than a catchy sounding cluster of meaningless words. You don't have the first idea what you're talking about. You can't define what making America "great" would entail. Come back when you can post something that makes sense.

 

45's slogan was once "Make Germany Great Again."

https://www.indy100.com/article/adolf-hitler-make-germany-great-again-donald-trump-7433621

 

But I think 45 knows more a/b world tyrants than anything else. He definitely admires them and wants to be one himself, but the U.S. Constitution and a few loyal Americans are making his "take over" more difficult.

[Traveler19491]

1 minute ago, PattayaJames said:

You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?

 

Is there a link citing anything more than unidentified officials, or is it just a case of It was in the WP so it must be true?

 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein warns against anonymous sources

 

Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country – let alone the branch of agency of government – with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/15/deputy-attorney-general-rod-rosenstein-warns-against-anonymous-sources/102907698/

While many, if not most, of us posting our negative views about Trump and applauding the investigators frequently refer to the information provided by unidentified sources, you would be hard-pressed to point to any post that asserts that any of this information is concrete and not to be questioned. You folks just get vehemently upset with anyone discussing such. The fact is that the Trump supporters object to any information that portrays Trump in a bad light. I, for one, am always careful to stipulate that whatever information I refer to, if it has not been corroborated, may prove to be untrue. However,  every...single...item...that...shows...Trump...to...not...be...what...his...believers...want...him...to...be is immediately labeled "fake news" and discounted for the simple reason that it comes from a media source you choose not to believe. Choosing not to believe is your prerogative. Your choice to not believe it, however, does not immediately make it not true. There is a tidal wave of negative information coming to light about Trump and those around him. Inevitably, some of it will prove untrue. However, given the sheer volume of negative information being investigated, to assert that none of it is true is, in my opinion, the height of willful blindness and "magical thinking". Is it possible that none of it is true? Certainly. Is it likely that none of it is true? Buy a lottery ticket. Your odds are better.

[selftaopath]

16 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?

 

Is there a link citing anything more than unidentified officials, or is it just a case of It was in the WP so it must be true?

 

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein warns against anonymous sources

 

Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country – let alone the branch of agency of government – with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/15/deputy-attorney-general-rod-rosenstein-warns-against-anonymous-sources/102907698/

45 loves anonymous sources; he has relied on them for a long time:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/30/donald-trump-actually-loves-anonymous-sources-unless-theyre-talking-about-him/?utm_term=.246b1d300e41

[PattayaJames]

11 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Well, 

"You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?"

You've got a point. And I would agree with you except for words of this one individual who seems to disagree with you. His name is Donald Trump.

Trump acknowledges he is under investigation in Russia probe

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Donald Trump acknowledged on Friday he is under investigation in a probe of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential race and possible collusion by his campaign - and seemed to assail the Justice Department official overseeing the inquiry.

 

Robert Mueller, the special counsel named by the department to investigate the Russia matter, is now examining whether Trump or others sought to obstruct the probe, a person familiar with the inquiry said on Thursday.

 

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt," Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to his May 9 dismissal of James Comey.

 

https://www.apnews.com/0172a576e8124251b5478818d1944632

 

 

What makes your comment especially gratifying is what I wrote in the thread about this article, that I was surprised that Trumpistas hadn't rushed to condemn trump for being another liar about the investigation.  Apparently, you must believe that he has joined the ranks of the Resistance.  And I agree with you about him. At least insofar as he is a liar. Thank you so much.

 

 

I had not seen that, but think he was just commenting on the WP story.

How would he know about it if true anyway?

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made an actual statement, which while not specific would seem to be referring to the WP story.

Edited June 17, 2017 by PattayaJames

[KC 71]

He loves throwing that hand signal ![emoji1305]

[Traveler19491]

6 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

I had not seen that, but think he was just commenting on the WP story.

How would he know about it if true anyway?

From the American Bar Association's "Standards on Prosecutorial Investigations":

 

STANDARD 1.4 VICTIMS, POTENTIAL WITNESSES, AND TARGETS DURING THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS

      (b) Upon request and if known, the prosecutor should inform a person or the person’s counsel, whether the person is considered to be a target, subject, witness or victim, including whether their status has changed, unless doing so would compromise a continuing investigation.

 

I guess maybe Trump's lawyer asked if he was under investigation? Stranger things have happened.

[ilostmypassword]

35 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

I had not seen that, but think he was just commenting on the WP story.

How would he know about it if true anyway?

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein made an actual statement, which while not specific would seem to be referring to the WP story.

Is this what you  are referring to?

"I am being investigated for firing the FBI Director by the man who told me to fire the FBI Director! Witch Hunt," Trump wrote on Twitter, referring to his May 9 dismissal of James Comey."

Definitely a comment on the WP story. Why else would he not have mentioned it or written what he did as a statement of fact unless he was referring to it as an unsubstantiated rumor. Makes sense. In oppositeworld.

[boomerangutang]

6 hours ago, Traveler19491 said:

This is why the cry to "Make America Great Again" is nothing more than a catchy sounding cluster of meaningless words. You don't have the first idea what you're talking about. You can't define what making America "great" would entail. Come back when you can post something that makes sense.

Look at Trump's base.  They're mostly middle-aged white folks.  Of course they're going to glorify the days of their youth when they weren't as fat, as sick, as unsexual, and depressed as they currently are.   Trump's base do the most pharma drugs, eat the most red meat, own the most guns, are nearly all are overweight and depressed (they lead the country in suicides stats).    

 

6 hours ago, PattayaJames said:

You can disagree with the uncorroborated "investigation" but not question it's existence?

Is there a link citing anything more than unidentified officials, or is it just a case of It was in the WP so it must be true?

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein warns against anonymous sources Americans should exercise caution before accepting as true any stories attributed to anonymous ‘officials,’ particularly when they do not identify the country – let alone the branch of agency of government – with which the alleged sources supposedly are affiliated. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/15/deputy-attorney-general-rod-rosenstein-warns-against-anonymous-sources/102907698/

Trump and his people put out stories daily, which are based on opinions, shout-radio hosts, and 'unidentified sources'.  

 

Most of the developments in the past months have been prompted by Wash.Post and NY.Times articles. Just two of many examples:  The WH was notified of Flynn being a paid foreign agent, but didn't fire him until 17 days later - when it came out in the Wash.Post.  Trump confirmed yesterday that he was under investigation.  Who first broke the story publicly?   The Wash.Post.   

That's why Trump hates highly respected news organizations:  They report the truth.  If you think they're lying, please list ONE news item where they've been factually wrong.  If they do print something that's proven wrong (later), they follow-up with a retraction.   Trump has never in his life retracted anything, except maybe the 'Obama is a Kenyan Muslim' fiction that he touted for 5 years.

[iReason]

7 hours ago, PattayaJames said:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/15/deputy-attorney-general-rod-rosenstein-warns-against-anonymous-sources/102907698/

 

This is getting very interesting.

 

I believe this is the third time today (on various threads) that I've seen a Trumpeteer use a link to support his argument from,

Wait for it: the "fake" MSM

 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by iReason

[Traveler19491]

1 hour ago, iReason said:

 

This is getting very interesting.

 

I believe this is the third time today (on various threads) that I've seen a Trumpeteer use a link to support his argument from,

Wait for it: the "fake" MSM

 

 

It's ALWAYS "fake"...unless they agree with it.

[boomerangutang]

Trump is like a drunk mad bull.   Even when pantywaist Rosenstein came out with an insipid & vague warning to the public (who they talk down to as if we're stupider than dumbells) about 'fake news' - in order to gain favor with his boss, Trump immediately lambasts Rosenstein, while hinting at firing him.  

 

It's as though a kid tries to curry favor by telling his dad; "I washed the dog today."

Dad shoots back, "You dunce, you weren't supposed to use shampoo. Just use cheap soap, you failure."

 

 

Edited June 17, 2017 by boomerangutang

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, Traveler19491 said:

Your willful ignorance regarding these matters is appalling.

Banks can and do plunder at will. Are you aware of how money is created? When you deposit one dollar in any bank, that bank is immediately permitted to literally create lend $10. Where did that $10 come from? Thin air. Literally.

"The credit markets have become a funnel for money distribution. However, in a fractional reserve banking system, new loans actually create even more new money. With a legally required reserve ratio of 10%, the new $100 billion in bank reserves could potentially result in a nominal monetary increase of $1 trillion." (Investopedia.com)

Your assertion that "Banks can't plunder anything without people giving them their money - buyer beware" is indicative of a pathetically poor understanding of how economics, the Federal Reserve, investments, and banking work. Banks don't need depositors per se. They need the Federal Reserve and borrowers. That's all. And with the money that is created by their borrowing from the Fed, they can then turn around and play with that money in the markets, putting that money into high-risk investments (like mortgages given to people who can't afford them, or exotic instruments that have high yields but also astronomical risks. Sound familiar?)

Your ludicrous assertion that "Banks can't plunder without people giving them their money - buyer beware") reveals a gross lack of knowledge/understanding about how banks, the Federal Reserve, investments, and money all work. Please try to gain at least a modicum of understanding about a subject before trying to make an intelligent sounding remark. It doesn't do you justice.

Try not to trip over your ego, won't you.

You keep making this personal, so why don't you personally try and keep your personal opinions about me to yourself.