|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On May 19 2020 08:39 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2020 08:34 Sent. wrote:
You change the definition of unfit
On a more serious note, how do you define "fit for the role of the president of the United States?
Being able to get approved by senate after an impeachment vote while being stark raving mad comes to mind.
Considering that both a looot of people and apparently the congressmen of his party don't judge Trump unfit for office despite him being the last person in America to be fit for that job - including because of his extremely doubtful mental health - you can expect the bar to be pretty low.
Although I don't think Democrat congressmen are as cynical, spineless and scummy as their republicans counterparts, and I expect them to hold their leaders somewhat accountable.
Pelosi meanwhile is baiting Trump to rage by pointing out that he is morbidly obese and shouldn't be taking chloroquine. Must be fun at time to be in her position.
|
On May 19 2020 14:33 CorsairHero wrote:
Trump is taking hydroxychloroquine
Any other elected member of the government doing the same? he says he does*
|
On May 19 2020 18:33 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2020 14:33 CorsairHero wrote:
Trump is taking hydroxychloroquine
Any other elected member of the government doing the same? he says he does*
Are you suggesting we can't take the president at his word? /s
According to Trump, not only does hydroxychloroquine cure coronavirus, but hcq can be taken preemptively to prevent even getting covid-19 in the first place. So now, just about everyone might as well take hcq, just to be safe... Sigh.
|
So, has it been established how Trump profits from HCQ sales yet?
|
On May 19 2020 19:34 Simberto wrote:
So, has it been established how Trump profits from HCQ sales yet?
You overestimate him so much.
|
On May 19 2020 19:59 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2020 19:34 Simberto wrote:
So, has it been established how Trump profits from HCQ sales yet? You overestimate him so much. A conman doesn't spend time on a con that doesn't profit him in some way. Either Trump or someone close to him profits from it or he wouldn't be pushing it.
|
Would be cool if they managed to look into his taxes (wanna bet they won't after hyping it?), or the Epstein scandal, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's a powder keg that would bury both parties and cause an outrage, so they agreed to keep it suppressed.
If you have a political system that is so corrupt that no one would be eligible, that's about the time everyone would agree to move towards something both parties would benefit from without angering the public.
I'm naturally distrustful of official narratives for a while now at the risk of sounding paranoid, but everything sounds very staged to me, even the US-China back and forth jabs seem like an act. Like that tweet 'good relatonship with XI, but don't want to talk to him right now'. Feels like our democracies have reached a Truman Show level of authenticity.
|
This hydroxychloroquine saga is the weirdest. People are attaching political leaning to whether or not you want to take a specific anti-malaria drug. A fox news host is now getting savaged by MAGAheads for not toeing the party line on the drug...
|
On May 19 2020 20:57 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
This hydroxychloroquine saga is the weirdest. People are attaching political leaning to whether or not you want to take a specific anti-malaria drug. A fox news host is now getting savaged by MAGAheads for not toeing the party line on the drug...
Due to Trump's attachment to (obsession with?) hcq, conservatives seem to be pushing the following assertion: You're either pro-Trump by also pushing for hcq, or you're anti-Trump by not pushing hcq. (And this is, of course, regardless of what the medical community and scientific researchers actually know and say about hcq.)
|
They'll even talk about the weather to not have to adress important issues. Hcq saga falls into the same category.
The important stuff happens behind closed doors while the public gets to see a sad comedy that at the end is at the discretion of doctors anyway and not the concern of politicians.
|
Half of it is a mix between the populistic "us against them" narrative, anti-intellectualism and the five years old mentality of the naughty toddler who derives childish pleasure from doing everything he is not supposed to.
Before being a conman, Trump is an idiot with the mind of an uneducated child.
|
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL
|
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history.
|
On May 20 2020 00:18 Vivax wrote:
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL
It's been a fantastic game of money-print lately. Junk bonds, commercial paper, there is no asset too questionable or risky for the Fed to buy up with money-printed leverage. And the only alleged consequence is that it "looks bad" if the Fed ends up bailing out companies and choosing winners in the process of doing this all!
On May 20 2020 01:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history.
With the exception of the actual left-wingers, they are barely any different. This whole song and dance is only notionally different from what Obama's administration and Fed did over the 8 years he was in charge.
|
On May 20 2020 01:16 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 00:18 Vivax wrote:
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL It's been a fantastic game of money-print lately. Junk bonds, commercial paper, there is no asset too questionable or risky for the Fed to buy up with money-printed leverage. And the only alleged consequence is that it "looks bad" if the Fed ends up bailing out companies and choosing winners in the process of doing this all! Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 01:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history. With the exception of the actual left-wingers, they are only notionally different. This whole song and dance is only notionally different from what Obama's administration and Fed did over the 8 years he was in charge.
Can you please elaborate on the parallel you're drawing between our current situation and past situations during Obama's presidency? I'm having some trouble understanding the similarities. Thanks 
|
On May 20 2020 01:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 01:16 LegalLord wrote:On May 20 2020 00:18 Vivax wrote:
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL It's been a fantastic game of money-print lately. Junk bonds, commercial paper, there is no asset too questionable or risky for the Fed to buy up with money-printed leverage. And the only alleged consequence is that it "looks bad" if the Fed ends up bailing out companies and choosing winners in the process of doing this all! On May 20 2020 01:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history. With the exception of the actual left-wingers, they are only notionally different. This whole song and dance is only notionally different from what Obama's administration and Fed did over the 8 years he was in charge. Can you please elaborate on the parallel you're drawing between our current situation and past situations during Obama's presidency? I'm having some trouble understanding the similarities. Thanks
Giant corporate bailouts, "unprecedented" Fed initiatives, racking up impressive deficits, remarkable lack of any meaningful accountability, etc. Might have been in a more pleasant package back then but the underlying mechanics are the same and all the things the Fed is doing today are straight out of the Obama-era playbook.
|
On May 20 2020 01:16 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 00:18 Vivax wrote:
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL It's been a fantastic game of money-print lately. Junk bonds, commercial paper, there is no asset too questionable or risky for the Fed to buy up with money-printed leverage. And the only alleged consequence is that it "looks bad" if the Fed ends up bailing out companies and choosing winners in the process of doing this all! Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 01:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history. With the exception of the actual left-wingers, they are only notionally different. This whole song and dance is only notionally different from what Obama's administration and Fed did over the 8 years he was in charge.
Basically you could own a mansion in the US with 2000 employees working for you and if you're in an ETF you get unlimited loans on the back of US debt if your credit rating dropped and you're not profitable.
If you get Blackrock to include you in an ETF, you get a money printer delivered to your house.
I have a feeling that down the road, if Trump ever gets his immunity lifted and his connections investigated, he'll have to run as far as he can.
-vid went private lol-
Here's the part where JPow talks about it. Noticeable how at some point he first says 'leverage markets' almost as a Freudian slip, then switches to non-investment-grade. It's like an admission that there are companies whose sole purpose is to leverage debt.
|
Will be interesting to see how quickly Judge Sullivan gets shot down by an appellate court for outsourcing the prosecution and baiting media hysteria in the Flynn case. Especially if the judges who shoot him down are not Trump appointees, since that would deprive the media of an out in the matter.
Can't say I endorse the source here but the Court's quote is what matters:
|
On May 20 2020 01:26 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 01:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 20 2020 01:16 LegalLord wrote:On May 20 2020 00:18 Vivax wrote:
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL It's been a fantastic game of money-print lately. Junk bonds, commercial paper, there is no asset too questionable or risky for the Fed to buy up with money-printed leverage. And the only alleged consequence is that it "looks bad" if the Fed ends up bailing out companies and choosing winners in the process of doing this all! On May 20 2020 01:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history. With the exception of the actual left-wingers, they are only notionally different. This whole song and dance is only notionally different from what Obama's administration and Fed did over the 8 years he was in charge. Can you please elaborate on the parallel you're drawing between our current situation and past situations during Obama's presidency? I'm having some trouble understanding the similarities. Thanks Giant corporate bailouts, "unprecedented" Fed initiatives, racking up impressive deficits, remarkable lack of any meaningful accountability, etc. Might have been in a more pleasant package back then but the underlying mechanics are the same and all the things the Fed is doing today are straight out of the Obama-era playbook.
Not as if Obama invented that stuff, but it doesn't do any good for us to pretend Trump did either.
|
On May 20 2020 03:50 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2020 01:26 LegalLord wrote:On May 20 2020 01:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On May 20 2020 01:16 LegalLord wrote:On May 20 2020 00:18 Vivax wrote:
Watching the senate online hearing, it's hilarious.
The fed leverages 200 billions to 1.3 trillion iirc. My jaw dropped. One guy was asking where the money is going and didn't get a clear answer, then he said 'what's 100 billions among friends' as a Trump jab lmao. And that he's going to look into it. Following the money must be a pretty good thriller with Trump.
Powell to HY purchases: 'These high-yield companies can even borrow themselves now!' LOL It's been a fantastic game of money-print lately. Junk bonds, commercial paper, there is no asset too questionable or risky for the Fed to buy up with money-printed leverage. And the only alleged consequence is that it "looks bad" if the Fed ends up bailing out companies and choosing winners in the process of doing this all! On May 20 2020 01:13 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I shiver thinking what would have happened if the democrats hadn't won the midterm. It would have been the greatest heist in history. With the exception of the actual left-wingers, they are only notionally different. This whole song and dance is only notionally different from what Obama's administration and Fed did over the 8 years he was in charge. Can you please elaborate on the parallel you're drawing between our current situation and past situations during Obama's presidency? I'm having some trouble understanding the similarities. Thanks Giant corporate bailouts, "unprecedented" Fed initiatives, racking up impressive deficits, remarkable lack of any meaningful accountability, etc. Might have been in a more pleasant package back then but the underlying mechanics are the same and all the things the Fed is doing today are straight out of the Obama-era playbook. Not as if Obama invented that stuff, but it doesn't do any good for us to pretend Trump did either.
Obama waited to see who's swimming naked when the tide went out and then bailed some out. He didn't disguise his bailouts as covid-19 relief, which is imo the difference here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
