- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:07 am to mwade91383
quote:Again, tie it to Trump cronies. Make your case. You haven't yet.
how many different blatant examples would it take?
With regard to "rumors," the evidence of insider cronyism with regard to Hunter is not refutable. Nor were some of the ACA transactions (bipartisan btw). The issues with Pelosi's trades are also well documented. Feinstein's husband made a fortune off of insider government property deals. Again, well documented.
So yes, there are issues. I'm just pointing out that, as with the Obamacare stuff, they are about access to information regardless of cronyism. I never accused Obama of leaking ACA info to cronies as you are with Trump here. Biden is an entirely different matter.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:21 am to NC_Tigah
Well we can’t, yet. All of the enforcement power is lead by the Trump admin who isn’t compelled to investigate Trump or his friends. Not to mention he personally has pretty much bullet proof immunity (scotus).
If/when the house flips the investigations will begin and we’ll see what we find. But to your point, that lack of proof right now doesn’t really suggest the truth is anything other than what’s painfully obvious.
You just don’t want to acknowledge it, which I understand.
If/when the house flips the investigations will begin and we’ll see what we find. But to your point, that lack of proof right now doesn’t really suggest the truth is anything other than what’s painfully obvious.
You just don’t want to acknowledge it, which I understand.
This post was edited on 10/11/25 at 10:24 am
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:30 am to mwade91383
quote:Right. Tell it to the plaintiffs in TX v PA.
Not to mention he personally has pretty much bullet proof immunity (scotus).
quote:That there is opportunity, motive and evidence of insider trading for anyone with access to the info, which is a wide catchment.
doesn’t really suggest the truth is anything other than what’s painfully obvious.
quote:Unfortunately, if Trump or his cronies are involved, your group in the House (and the previous admin) shot its credibility in the previous "investigations."
If/when the house flips the investigations will begin and we’ll see what we find.
quote:You're mistaken. I just go to where the facts lie.
You just don’t want to acknowledge it
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:40 am to John Barron
quote:
He should have not listened to Bessent back in April and kept giving Commie China 90 day extensions. This has given China more time to prepare and reroute their products to other countries for export. China also knows any significant drop in the stock market and Bessent will be begging Trump for another 90 day extension because his Wall Street buddies can't tolerate a few thousand market sell off
This is the issue.
Have a plan. Say what you mean. Do what you say.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:42 am to John Barron
China will find new trading partners and make the software itself.
The US and Europe are forcing a strengthening alliance between China, Russia, and their allies.
The US and Europe are forcing a strengthening alliance between China, Russia, and their allies.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:43 am to NC_Tigah
The scotus immunity ruling was July 2024, 4 years after tx vs pa, what’s your point?
You’re right. The facts won’t lie. All of these trades have paper trails, literally black and white. Who’s presenting that data w names and dates is irrelevant unless you’re a total partisan hack. But I’m sure posters will come up with some goofy way to explain it away when faced w overwhelming evidence of corruption.
“Ya know, it’s Dems fault they didn’t insider trade harder when they had the chance!”
You’re right. The facts won’t lie. All of these trades have paper trails, literally black and white. Who’s presenting that data w names and dates is irrelevant unless you’re a total partisan hack. But I’m sure posters will come up with some goofy way to explain it away when faced w overwhelming evidence of corruption.
“Ya know, it’s Dems fault they didn’t insider trade harder when they had the chance!”
Posted on 10/11/25 at 10:52 am to John Barron
quote:$440B in exports to the US says you're wrong. No one's making that difference up. The delay has also given time for US importers to restructure their supply chains. Art of the Deal.
This has given China more time to prepare and reroute their products to other countries for export.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 11:08 am to mwade91383
quote:It's the same court.
The scotus immunity ruling was July 2024, 4 years after tx vs pa, what’s your point?
quote:You're sure of a lot of stuff you have limited reason to be sure of.
I’m sure posters will come up with some goofy way to explain it away when faced w overwhelming evidence of corruption.
In some instances though, you may be right.
I'm sure if slamdunk evidence comes out that Trump cronies made bank on these insider transactions, there will be folks here defending them. For my part, I'd be disappointed and a little surprised if such evidence surfaces. Yet, if it does, so be it. I'll call it as I see it. E.g., I got plenty of DVs defending Paul Pelosi's option transactions, and Loeffler's as well. But a spade is a spade.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 11:11 am to John Barron
Finally. time to rip the bandaid off.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 11:19 am to BuckI
quote:The US and EU account for 1/3rd of China's exports. That won't be made up by strengthened alliances between China, Russia, and their allies.
The US and Europe are forcing a strengthening alliance between China, Russia, and their allies.
China is a state controlled economy. It needs to pay its workers enough for them to develop them as a reasonable consumer base. It needs to pay its workers enough for them to be able to afford many of the goods China now exports. Of course, higher wages would entail more expense in manufacturing, raising the cost of exported goods, so Xi is resistant.
We simply cannot allow the CCP to avoid that inconvenience at our expense.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 11:24 am to mwade91383
quote:
Do you have a point or are you just yelling at the clouds? This is a message board. Do you know what a message board is?
Yep, sure do. I guess you aren’t capable of understanding.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:10 pm to NC_Tigah
Trump needs to negotiate with Xi first before he makes a decision. If the Chinese need us as much as you say, then they will agree to policies that benefit both sides. Forcing them to seek new trade partners might make things more difficult now, but the Chinese are resourceful and will likely succeed in the long run as new markets emerge and grow.
America and Europe need China if they want to contain Putin.
America and Europe need China if they want to contain Putin.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:19 pm to mwade91383
quote:
More market manipulation for his crony friends.
Buy the dip while it lasts (which is shorter and shorter every time he does this).
I scooped up some more XRP when the crypto mini-crash happened yesterday.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:31 pm to mwade91383
And he probably gave them all a heads up as well.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:34 pm to BuckI
Which is why the USA should have good trading with India but unfortunately India plays China and USA against each other.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:37 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Roger, You are the dumbass - you and the people who think we can continue our Polyannish China policy as they continue to execute their plans to conquer us.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:42 pm to BuckI
quote:
America and Europe need China if they want to contain Putin
You have that completely backwards.
Russia has $2.2 trillion in nominal GDP and a population of 150 million
China has a $19 trillion GDP and a population of 1.4 billion
The US has a $30 trillion GDP and 340 million people
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:42 pm to BuckI
quote:Then we're in BIG trouble
America and Europe need China if they want to contain Putin.
Posted on 10/11/25 at 12:45 pm to ksayetiger
Electronics
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News