Final-Fan said:
I disagree with your assumptions. |
Ok.
Machiavellian said:
But you are wrong. Your point has been proven to be wrong because after showing the short form before election, the long form after election, the people who wanted to use the issue as some political smear campaign still looked for ways to dismissed it. In other words nothing that Obama did was going to change the minds of people who do not care about proof but instead what they feel or believe is true. The difference again with Trump is the lying. He doesn't know when to stop and he will continue to lie even when proven he is lying. You know its really getting bad when People on Fox news start to call him a liar because he continues to do it so much even they cannot ignore it. |
Proven to be wrong? Did you go back in time and play out the scenario I purposed to find it didn't turn out like I thought it would, or are you guessing and assuming? Is guessing and assuming the same as factual truth now? Do different decisions not lead to different outcomes?
|
Machiavellian said: Here is you giving another excuse for Trump ignorance. Comey in his position does not have to tell the president who is also under the same investigation if he is cleared. No law enforcement person tells a person under investigation if they are in the clear or not until after the investigation. It doesn't matter what Comey opinion of Trump is or was. People who investigate other people do not have to like you to do their job and you do not have to like your boss to do your job. What you are stating here which is obstruction is that because Comey would not tell the president he was not under investigation, Trump fired him. Then your ignorance and Trump ignorance would land you both in the same place we are here today. |
Comey did admit he told the President, but gave the reasoning I provided as to why he didn't want to tell the public. If Comey's opinion of Trump doesn't matter, why put him on TV, the former head of the FBI, an evidence based individual, and have him constantly talk about how he felt about Trump? This wasn't some new TV show, it's accusing the President of firing the head of the FBI, supposedly because he's a Russian spy/puppet with no worthy direct evidence.
|
Machiavellian said: So you believe all top officials in Trump administration, his Son and Son in Law, attorney and campaign manager attends a meeting in itself is a violations and Trump did not know about it. Next in the same sentence, you say they came clean after they lied about ever having the meeting. Then you forget that they stated that the meeting was about abortions which was another lie when it was about dirt on Hillary. How many lies before we get to the truth. Now you expect everyone to just believe nothing came from the meeting since we have to take their word for it after lying 4 times. Give me a break, who would believe them now after lying so many times and only coming to another excuse after they were exposed as lying. |
You said Trump had contact with them, not that he may or may not have known about the meeting. So Trumps people were lied to, they lied initially to the media, and the media constantly lies about them. Everyone is a liar. Can we hate them all, call it pretty even, or can we only pick one to hate?
|
Machiavellian said: What makes you believe Trump is innocent of working with Russia. If anything, everyone of the people who were asked if they had any previous contact with Russia during his campaign have been found lying. Flynn, Session, Trump JR and Krusher, Manford hell you name it. Just maybe if their reflex was not to lie first and be proven guilty first they maybe you would have a point. |
You mean the people who were legally aloud to have contact with the Russians, but were being demonized for doing so because Hillary and the Dems said they are the epitome of evil, since they hacked her server and found a tonne of dirt? The same Hillary and Dems who helped the Russians to acquire a sizable amount of American uranium not all that long ago?
|
Machiavellian said: American economy was doing well before he got into office. Something you have to understand about macroeconomics is that things do not fall apart right away. Instead it usually take years for the fallout of someone policies to have effects that leads to economic crisis. So if Trump did nothing, the economy would still be going strong since all the numbers were a steady slide going down. If Trump gets another 4 years, lets see how well things go from there. As for Trump trying something new, given more to the rich well, I believe history will show its not only nothing new but has been done multiple times and each time we were further into debt. Since the Trend seems to be continuing, I guess you have not paid attention to the how the Deficit is above a Trillion now and steadily climbing. I guess something like that means nothing when Trump is in office since he was the one who stated he would bring it in check. The people getting fired are the people who got caught. Interesting how that works. You say you hire all the best people but you hire a bunch of crooks. They are all good until they get caught then you can say you are draining the swamp. Lol, you really do eat that up don't you. |
Now it's doing even better. What about 2008? Things fell apart quite rapidly. Where was the Gov on that one? I'm also going to assume, if after 8 years of Trump, and a couple years of a new Dem President, if the economy collapsed, it would no doubt be due to Trump, and if it continued to soar, it would be the new policies put in place, and not the outcome of the prior momentum. The Dems didn't fix the books, and neither are the Reps, so that makes the most recent Prez and his admin horrible, yet the previous one's were not? How do you know they are being fired for being 'caught' and not for PR reasons? Seems like PR is a much bigger problem today than actually doing something wrong, considering there's plenty of people backing what they did, as well as bashing them, regardless of the accusations. Almost seems like right and wrong isn't black and white for some strange reason.
|
Machiavellian said: Exactly, Steve was booted from Apple came back and made the company the most successful in the world. Talk about taking a company who needed MS to bail them out a few times to being above that same company in market cap. That is what success looks like. Steve Jobs took Apple from the brink of ruin to the biggest company in the world. Now, you tell me, what company did Trump run that was on the brink, in bad shape or going south that he took and brought it to success. This is the difference when you put Trump in the same mix as someone like Jobs. Unlike Jobs, every company that was in any kind of financial crisis under Trump they failed. If they did not fail he bailed on them took as much money as he could and left them in rubles. For some reason you want people to give Trump the benefit of the doubt but if you were a hiring boss and looked at his previous record, you would not even think twice about giving him the job. |
So Steve did such a great job at Apple and didn't screw up at all, in anyway, that his own company decided to completely boot him out? Can't say the same for Trump. Apple, as well as Next, also crashed and burned on new ventures more than a few times as well, but we won't bring those up, because, well. The Rep voters would say the Country was on the brink and now it's on it's way back, but they don't count apparently.
|
Machiavellian said: Here is a perfect example when ignorance rules decisions. Just this Sunday Trump patted himself on a decision concerning Ford and their Ford Focus. This is another example of a host of examples of ignorance that he displays and when maybe keeping quiet would be better than opening his mouth for everyone to see. https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ford/2018/09/09/ford-analysts-trump-tweet-focus/1250457002/ When you do not understand about how global trade and supply train works, you make ignorant comments like Trump does making everyone even more afraid he doesn't know what the heck he is doing. I will give you one thing, giving. I also love how he constant make statements in his ignorance forcing even Fox to correct him like his statement about GDP being above unemployment for the first time in 100 years. |
It's not Trumps fault that Ford has decided due to the fact they aren't selling that many Actives, that it isn't worth it to move production to the States.
We already talked about how the Gov doesn't and shouldn't stay the same for too long, and now your saying trade can only be done a certain way and can't and shouldn't ever change? Isn't Ford another giant evil corporation who must be friends with Trump? Why is he screwing them then? Do these trade deals hurt everyone and everything, or only certain entities? If the economy is doing so great overall, and the 'greedy, slimy, good for nothing' mega corps are doing just ok, then I don't see the problem.
Last edited by EricHiggin - on 10 September 2018
