I hope Grandpa Joe goes all in on Lizzie over these

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

I think the point made was that to some; being a benefactor to the tuition issue while at the same time building a campaign complaining about tuition, she might seem a tad hypocritical.

I am also intrigued by your comment about Pence. I see him as a pin headed Neanderthal but I think he believes what he spouts and generally lives by it. I may have missed something, but don't see him as the "High Priest of Hypocrisy" No?

Nothing from Pence has indicated to me that he's a "pin head".

Remember when he clowned Tim Kaine in that debate?

Even the Democratic caricature of Pence is very machiavellian, but not a pin head.

 

[UncleMark]

I am also intrigued by your comment about Pence. I see him as a pin headed Neanderthal but I think he believes what he spouts and generally lives by it. I may have missed something, but don't see him as the "High Priest of Hypocrisy" No?

You don't see his fawning, bootlicking obsequiousness to the immoral/amoral Trump -- done only to advance his own political prospects -- as hypocrisy?

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

She's digging in on this one

 

[hoot1]

She's digging in on this one

View embedded media

Thanks, JDB, for the update.

Event happened 50 years ago when she was pregnant at age 22. This makes her 72. Her current age to me is a bigger factor than something which happened a half century ago.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Thanks, JDB, for the update.

Event happened 50 years ago when she was pregnant at age 22. This makes her 72. Her current age to me is a bigger factor than something which happened a half century ago.

It's only a factor if there are alternatives. Unless Pete gains sudden traction, which is highly unlikely, the choices are Biden, Sanders or Liz and Trump. Think about that.

Thanks Baby Boomers.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

What policies would she be able to actually do by fiat?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/elizab...sses-are-bracing-11570643931?mod=hp_lead_pos8

 

[mainway_toys]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/elizab...sses-are-bracing-11570643931?mod=hp_lead_pos8

If I was a Gordon Gecko wannabe I'd definitely vote for someone other than Warren.

 

[NPT]

Speaks to character. Are you going to vote for another liar after complaining about the current one? You hypocrite.

You have to understand.... it's all depends on who's telling they lies.

 

[hoot1]

You're pretty emblematic of Warren support. Most liberals understanding of Wall Street comes from Hollywood movies.

I would bet people who work on Wall Street cannot possibly understand all the facets which make up the collective term "Wall Street". Parts, just in the investment community, include stock exchanges, large banks, brokerages, securities, and underwriting firms. Each of the parts then has specialists within those firms.

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

I would bet people who work on Wall Street cannot possibly understand all the facets which make up the collective term "Wall Street". Parts, just in the investment community, include stock exchanges, large banks, brokerages, securities, and underwriting firms. Each of the parts then has specialists within those firms.

So you're saying it's more complex than "Capitalists elites who steal from the poor and rape the economy"?

Because that's not what Lizzie and Bernie have told me.

 

[hoot1]

So you're saying it's more complex than "Capitalists elites who steal from the poor and rape the economy"?

Because that's not what Lizzie and Bernie have told me.

We also have those who say if we give more tax breaks to high income investors the economy will take off like a rocket with everyone reaping the benefits of growth in the GDP.

 

[VanPastorMan]

This is the setup and extortion threat.
(3/H!i,
The President:
Well it 1s·very nice of you to say that.
I will say that we do a lot for Ukraine.
We spend a lot of effort and a lot of time.
Much more than the European countries are doing and they should be helping you more than they are.
Germany does almost nothing for you (HUGE LIE). All they do is talk and I think it's something that you should really ask them about.
When I was speaking to Angela Merkel she talks Ukraine, but she doesn't do anything. A lot of the European countries are the same way so I think it's something you want to look at but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.
I wouldn't say that it's reciprocal necessarily because things are happening that are not good but the United States has been very very good to Ukraine.





The President
I would like you to do us a favor(solicitation which seems right) though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it.
I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike (solitcitation in case he missed it the first time and then the Insurance Policy Conspiracy theory)
... I guess you have one of your wealthy people
... The server, they say Ukraine has.it
There are a lot. of things that went on, the :whole situation
.. I think you are surrounding yourself with some of the same people.
I would like to have the Attorney General call you or your people (It's now a conspiracy) and I would like you to get to the bottom of it�.
As you said yesterday, that whole nonsense ended with a very poor performance by a man named Robert Mueller, an incompetent performance, but they say a lot of it started with Ukraine.
Whatever you can do, it's very important that· you do it if that's possible.


So in one call we get extortion and solicitation of a foreign government for dirt on a rival.

He asked Russia and China publicly for the same thing and Australia via another call.

If you can't read, comprehend and learn at least sit quietly in the corner and not repeat drivel.

I want you to know that I really appreciate your post. A sincere question by me is this. Is there any real evidence in what you have said? Another question is if you were a prosecutor would you win the case if you brought these conclusions before a grand jury? Again, I do appreciate you answering without any vitriol. Blessings to you and your family.

 

[VanPastorMan]

You're giving VPM too much credit by assuming he might actually have a response to the one rabbit hole out of the forty that he threw up against the wall in this thread that you've chosen to respond to in detail.

My problem is I have read the phone call transcript and I don't see anything and I say it again anything that is impeachable. Joe Biden did get an investigator, a lawyer fired during the previous Ukrainian administration which was corrupt. He did use the quid pro quo to get his son Hunter off. Now what is the President supposed to do when he learns this? Is Joe Biden unable to be investigated because he is running for President? President Trump is running for president too so can you say that the Democrats are doing all this for political purposes?

 

[VanPastorMan]

Your basic problem is your intentional refusal to accept that (1) no quid pro quo is needed at all to constitute some of the accepted grounds for impeachment, and (2) in issues where an actual quid pro quo IS required, there is no requirement for proof that someone stated directly "This is a quid pro quo!" or "This is in exchange for that!"

"Such agreements need not be stated in express terms; corrupt actors are seldom so clumsy, and the law may not be evaded through winks and nods. Prosecutors often prove tacit agreements through circumstantial evidence including the timing of events and actions of the parties... "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/23/criminal-implications-trumps-ukraine-call/

Another of your problems (almost as bad) is that you ask "What was wrong with that phone call?" like you know what was actually said, NO ONE KNOWS THE EXACT WORDS BECAUSE TRUMP HAS NOT RELEASED AN ACTUAL VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT! All he did was release an edited summary prepared by his staff. Apparently, Trump has stashed away a more complete summary under lock and key. Asking your question does not prove Trump is innocent.

Trump's summary was bad enough. Make no mistake -- there is a reasonable chance that Trump's admitted statements (according to the non-transcript summary he released) could be construed by a jury as a quid pro quo promise.

We do know from the released transcript that the original whistleblower didn't know what she or he was talking about.

 

[Cortez88]

My problem is I have read the phone call transcript and I don't see anything and I say it again anything that is impeachable. Joe Biden did get an investigator, a lawyer fired during the previous Ukrainian administration which was corrupt. He did use the quid pro quo to get his son Hunter off. Now what is the President supposed to do when he learns this? Is Joe Biden unable to be investigated because he is running for President? President Trump is running for president too so can you say that the Democrats are doing all this for political purposes?

Here you go:

https://www.justsecurity.org/66475/...ion-of-whistleblower-complaint-an-annotation/

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

If I was a Gordon Gecko wannabe I'd definitely vote for someone other than Warren.

Perhaps you should tell Martha Stewart that

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

I would bet people who work on Wall Street cannot possibly understand all the facets which make up the collective term "Wall Street". Parts, just in the investment community, include stock exchanges, large banks, brokerages, securities, and underwriting firms. Each of the parts then has specialists within those firms.

That's because only the uninformed use the term these days. Most of the traditional "Wall Street" houses are in Midtown.

 

[Standard Issue]

I want you to know that I really appreciate your post. A sincere question by me is this. Is there any real evidence in what you have said? Another question is if you were a prosecutor would you win the case if you brought these conclusions before a grand jury? Again, I do appreciate you answering without any vitriol. Blessings to you and your family.

You cannot ask a foreign country to provide anything of value to a US political campaign. Full stop.
He did it in the transcript and publicly.
He is guilty.
Full stop.

 

[mainway_toys]

Perhaps you should tell Martha Stewart that

Martha Stewart is still alive? Since when?

Is she somehow relevant to Warren?

 

[UncleMark]

Martha Stewart is still alive?

I hope so. I had kind of a thing for her back in the day.

 

[ButHerEmails]

I hope so. I had kind of a thing for her back in the day.

Well yeah she was a model

 

[mainway_toys]

I hope so. I had kind of a thing for her back in the day.

GROSS!

 

[UncleMark]

GROSS!

 

[meridian]

She has a serious problem with honesty....

Says the person who voted for Trump!

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Martha Stewart is still alive? Since when?

Is she somehow relevant to Warren?

She's relevant to Gordon Gekko. Try and keep up.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Says the person who voted for Trump!

Lol here we go again...

 

[hoot1]

I hope so. I had kind of a thing for her back in the day.

Damn, I thought you were a Julia Child kinda guy.

 

[UncleMark]

Damn, I thought you were a Julia Child kinda guy.

That's cold, man. Really cold.

 

[hoot1]

What policies would she be able to actually do by fiat?

As we learned when "Wall Street" was teetering in 2008, government, regulators and do gooders such as Warren aren't the solution to a complex set of financial relationships. Relationships which can be both beneficial and dangerous.

Just like figuring out how to provide health care, finding the perfect investment community combination which protects consumers and offers attractive opportunities to investors is almost impossible. Impossible because taking sides with one, as politicians do, always works to the disadvantage of the other.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

As we learned when "Wall Street" was teetering in 2008, government, regulators and do gooders such as Warren aren't the solution to a complex set of financial relationships. Relationships which can be both beneficial and dangerous.

Just like figuring out how to provide health care, finding the perfect investment community combination which protects consumers and offers attractive opportunities to investors is almost impossible. Impossible because taking sides with one, as politicians do, always works to the disadvantage of the other.

The trade off you allude to is increased restrictions on investors reduces capital availability and increases costs, reducing returns for those that own assets, and thus, valuations of those assets. There is no question that some level of regulation is warranted (it shouldn't be zero), but the question of how much is subjective, not objective and unable to be solved or optimized through science.

 

[hoot1]

The trade off in your scenario is increased restrictions on investors reduces capital availability and increases costs, reducing returns for those that own assets, and thus, valuations of those assets. There is no question that some level of regulation is warranted (it shouldn't be zero), but the question of how much is subjective, not objective and unable to be solved or optimized through science.

Didn't think I offered a scenario.

Please help me.

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

Didn't think I offered a scenario.

Please help me.

Scenario was the wrong term. I'll edit.

 

[hoot1]

Scenario was the wrong term. I'll edit.

JDB, I am thinking scenario was the right word.

What my diatribe did not offer was a solution.

It ended by saying, just like figuring out how to provide health care, finding the perfect investment community combination which protects consumers and offers attractive opportunities to investors is almost impossible. Impossible because taking sides with one, as politicians do, always works to the disadvantage of the other.

 

[mainway_toys]

Still gross. Even if you think her beautiful (she doesn't do a thing for me), once that novelty wears off, you're just stuck with Martha Stewart.