-->
@PressF4Respect
Sure, the pope is rich, but I'm pretty sure he isn't THE most financially powerful individual in the world.
You probably had zero incentive to investigate.
trump is the most powerful living thing in the history of the universe
Posts
Total:
52
-->
@Greyparrot
Ok. This is what I found.
According to allthingsfinance, as the spiritual leader of the Catholic world and the King of the Vatican, the pope's net worth is around $10-$15 billion. This makes him extremely financially powerful, but still not nearly enough for him to be #1.
He has substantially more influence though, ranking #6 in Forbes' Most Powerful People in the world (in 2018). Powerful, but people like Xi, Putin, and even Trump are still leagues ahead of him in terms of power.
-->
@PressF4Respect
If we're talking about financial power, then the pope would face some serious competition from powerful billionaire tycoons, moguls, and oligarchs for the title of "most financially powerful person in the world". Sure, the pope is rich, but I'm pretty sure he isn't THE most financially powerful individual in the world.
I never argued that the pope was the wealthiest financier--The Rothschilds are, and as followers of the Kaballah, they obey the pope. The Vatican's finances informs his power, not define it. I purposefully mentioned where the investments were primarily made, the Vatican properties around the world, and his 1.3 Billion man army who owe 10% of their incomes in weekly tithes. That is not to mention the Luciferian influence on other religions like Hinduism, Buddhism and Wicca.
I know the pope has had several controversies regarding possible cover-ups, but that isn't nearly enough to amount to a global child sex trafficking ring. This is something I'm going to have to look further into. Also not sure about the extent of the Pope's influence in Hollywood (if there is indeed any).
The pope is a Luciferian--the head Luciferian; not a Christian. In 2013, there was a court case in Brussells where the pope--then pope Benedict XVI--was forced to step down because documents implicating Ratzinger in the practice of child sex abuse and ritual child sacrifice (It is not a coincidence that the statue of Moloch--the god of child sacrifice--rests in the coliseum) led to the discovery of Magisterial Privilege--a papal rite which dictates that every new pope must engage children in sexual intercourse, as well as exsanguinate said children through consumption. I leave verification/falsification to your discretion.
Hollywood is the center of Luciferian media--notably through Disney, Columbia Pictures, Paramount and Warner Bros.
According to allthingsfinance, as the spiritual leader of the Catholic world and the King of the Vatican, the pope's net worth is around $10-$15 billion. This makes him extremely financially powerful, but still not nearly enough for him to be #1.
He's worth more. The numbers you mentioned are only estimates because the Vatican City State law protects the Vatican (Holy See) from disclosing all of its finances. And once again, I'm not arguing that he's the wealthiest; only the most powerful. The Catholic Church has publicly been exposed for its institutionalized pederasty (and that's because they worship a Greek incarnation of Lucifer known as Pan) and yet it still persists. Xi, Putin, and even Trump, could any of them get away with that?
Although I like most of his policies, I can't agree with the idea of him being THAT powerful. I'd say the most powerful person in human history would probably be one of the British monarchs when Britain was at its peak world dominance.
-->
@Athias
Interesting. I'm going to have to do further research on the extent of papal influence (probably very difficult given how covert the papacy is in its dealings).
A man is only as powerful as we make them. Donald Trump's "power" comes from, not necessarily himself alone, but rather the support we give to him, and the votes we give to him. He did not become president of the United States and gain all of this power over night. He had to campaign, convince enough of us to support him and vote for him, as well as defeat other opponent's like Hillary Clinton who also wanted to become president.
We can all just as easily take most of, if not all of his "power" away by not voting for him, and by choosing to stop supporting him.
So we can argue all day about whether or not he deserves the power that we have given him, about whether he is competent or worthy of that power, but ultimately, his power comes from us.
Being "the most powerful living thing in the history of the universe" just means that you have had the most support in the history of the universe.
-->
@Christen
So we can argue all day about whether or not he deserves the power that we have given him, about whether he is competent or worthy of that power, but ultimately, his power comes from us.
you kind of miss my point though. We could elect a chicken president, but since it has no concept of what that power is, or how to use it, it in fact has no power at all. Trump is like the chicken. He is an imbecile. He has no real concept of how to get things done. He doesn't understand the limits of his power, or even what his job is. He fails to understand basic principles of reality (like don't drink cleaning products or you can't nuke a hurricane).
You are correct that his power comes from the people who elected him. But his ineptitude means that this power is largely wasted as he can't use it. Therefore he is not "the most powerful person in history of the universe". He is a man-child who has been placed into high office and is proceeding to throw tantrums when he can't get his way.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Donald Trump is by no means "inept." Don't let the simple manner of his speech and his brash demeanor fool you. He understands his base very well, and he's pandering to them. The very same people who said he was too idiotic to "win" the presidency (although, in reality he was "selected,") are the same people who have had egg on their faces since November 2016. And to his credit, the minutia of his stance against child-sex trafficking is by far more substantial than these pedophile politicians boast. That fact, unfortunately, loses to the "fake news."you kind of miss my point though. We could elect a chicken president, but since it has no concept of what that power is, or how to use it, it in fact has no power at all. Trump is like the chicken. He is an imbecile. He has no real concept of how to get things done. He doesn't understand the limits of his power, or even what his job is. He fails to understand basic principles of reality (like don't drink cleaning products or you can't nuke a hurricane).You are correct that his power comes from the people who elected him. But his ineptitude means that this power is largely wasted as he can't use it. Therefore he is not "the most powerful person in history of the universe". He is a man-child who has been placed into high office and is proceeding to throw tantrums when he can't get his way.
-->
@Athias
Donald Trump is by no means "inept."
he really, really is.
Don't let the simple manner of his speech and his brash demeanor fool you. He understands his base very well, and he's pandering to them.
true. he's a bit of an idiot savant at salesmanship. He's a talented con man. but an absolute garbage president.
The very same people who said he was too idiotic to "win" the presidency (although, in reality he was "selected,") are the same people who have had egg on their faces since November 2016.
even he didn't think he was going to win. he was doing it in order to make money and pump up his brand. But again, his ability to con people into believing in him does not mean he is a powerful president. His inability to get anything done proves he is inept and ineffective.
And to his credit, the minutia of his stance against child-sex trafficking is by far more substantial than these pedophile politicians boast. That fact, unfortunately, loses to the "fake news."
i have no idea what you are trying to argue here. Are you trying to say that trump (an admitted sexual assaulter) is somehow morally superior to people who commit other sex crimes?
-->
@HistoryBuff
he really, really is.
No, he really isn't. Dislike of Trump informs neither his capacity nor his competence.
true. he's a bit of an idiot savant at salesmanship.
How much of his abilities as a businessman are you familiar with? Do you have intimate information on his practices?
He's a talented con man.
Well... he is a politician.
but an absolute garbage president.
All presidents are or have been underwhelming. Trump no more than the others.
even he didn't think he was going to win. he was doing it in order to make money and pump up his brand.
How do you know what he thought?
But again, his ability to con people into believing in him does not mean he is a powerful president. His inability to get anything done proves he is inept and ineffective.
What hasn't he got done?
i have no idea what you are trying to argue here. Are you trying to say that trump (an admitted sexual assaulter) is somehow morally superior to people who commit other sex crimes?
You mean that conversation with Billy Bush where Trump states that his stardom would give him discretion to grab women by the pussy. Are you forgetting that he also stated in that conversation that the women would "let him do it"? Unlike his current opponent, Joe Biden, who actually commits sexual assault, no less to an eight year old girl on live television. And I'm not making a moral argument. You claim he doesn't get anything done. First it would be prudent to discern his duties as president and substantiate how his last four years have demonstrated a dereliction in said duties.
-->
@Athias
No, he really isn't. Dislike of Trump informs neither his capacity nor his competence.
Cycling through his cabinet like a carousel and creating a horrendously dysfunctional government doesn't exactly scream "competent".
How much of his abilities as a businessman are you familiar with? Do you have intimate information on his practices?
He wrote an entire book on his practices.
“The final key to the way I promote is bravado. I play to people's fantasies. People may not always think big themselves. but they can get very excited by those who do. That is why a little hyperbole never hurts. People want to believe that something is the biggest, the greatest and the most spectacular.”― Donald J. Trump, Trump: The Art of the Deal
Well... he is a politician.
Good point
All presidents are or have been underwhelming. Trump no more than the others.
We can all agree that Trump is no Washington, Lincoln, or Kennedy.
How do you know what he thought?
What hasn't he got done?
You mean that conversation with Billy Bush where Trump states that his stardom would give him discretion to grab women by the pussy. Are you forgetting that he also stated in that conversation that the women would "let him do it"?
Yup, because using your celebrity status to intimidate women into being silent about it equals consent. Also, if it was completely consensual, then why would Trump's attorney pay $130,000 in hush money to sign a nondisclosure agreement?
Unlike his current opponent, Joe Biden, who actually commits sexual assault, no less to an eight year old girl on live television.
Needs evidence (which shouldn't be difficult considering since you claim it was on live television)
First it would be prudent to discern his duties as president and substantiate how his last four years have demonstrated a dereliction in said duties.
Already done.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Cycling through his cabinet like a carousel and creating a horrendously dysfunctional government doesn't exactly scream "competent".
"Cryptic" tweets and botched Easter Egg rolls from three years ago don't count as "dysfunctional." Governments are dysfunctional for reasons beyond Trump.
He wrote an entire book on his practices.“The final key to the way I promote is bravado. I play to people's fantasies. People may not always think big themselves. but they can get very excited by those who do. That is why a little hyperbole never hurts. People want to believe that something is the biggest, the greatest and the most spectacular.”― Donald J. Trump, Trump: The Art of the Deal
You mean the vanity piece he had ghost written? That's the reason I qualified my question by using the term "intimate."
We can all agree that Trump is no Washington, Lincoln, or Kennedy.
Washington, Lincoln, or Kennedy were no Washington, Lincoln, or Kennedy. There's a lot of "mythology" in their legacies.
So, nothing directly from Trump?
Fair enough.
Yup, because using your celebrity status to intimidate women into being silent about it equals consent. Also, if it was completely consensual, then why would Trump's attorney pay $130,000 in hush money to sign a nondisclosure agreement?
Is that what that was, or are you merely speculating based on your impressions of the NDA?
Needs evidence (which shouldn't be difficult considering since you claim it was on live television)
It's not a claim; I'm citing a fact. I've provided enough of a description where you can verify the information on your own. If you need more of a description, you can search, "Joe Biden pinches the nipple of Montana Senator's 8 year-old niece." You can clearly see the girl recoil right after he does it. And it's not his first run-in with a prepubescent girl.
-->
@Athias
No, he really isn't. Dislike of Trump informs neither his capacity nor his competence.
no, his failure to accomplish anything useful informs his capacity and his competence.
How much of his abilities as a businessman are you familiar with? Do you have intimate information on his practices?
about how he was handed a fortune by his father? About how he ran a number of businesses into the ground? About how most of his businesses are now run by other people and he largely just trades on the brand name he managed to make out of his name?
Trump was basically washed up before the apprentice. He got onto that show because real business men had better things to do than be on some TV show, so the show creator turned to trump. That show managed to convince people that he actually knew something about business. He then built a business around that false impression by selling on his name. The same way he sold on that name and belief that he was competent to run for president.
He's a talented con man.Well... he is a politician.
no, he's a con man whose con got out in front of him. He wanted to run for president to pump up the name recognition of his brand. He didn't intend to win, he intended to do the only thing he cares about, make himself richer and more famous.
but an absolute garbage president.All presidents are or have been underwhelming. Trump no more than the others.
trump has accomplished extremely little in office. He is a really shitty president.
But again, his ability to con people into believing in him does not mean he is a powerful president. His inability to get anything done proves he is inept and ineffective.What hasn't he got done?
What has he got done? He hasn't accomplished anything to do with globalization. He hasn't ended wars. He did manage a tax cut, but it was 99% for the rich and corporations, so not exactly a huge success for most americans. He has succeeded in ballooning the deficit (that the right loves to pretend they care about when democrats are in office, oddly silent about it now). So tell me, what has he accomplished?
You mean that conversation with Billy Bush where Trump states that his stardom would give him discretion to grab women by the pussy. Are you forgetting that he also stated in that conversation that the women would "let him do it"?
i believe his statement was "you know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
He "doesn't even wait". he just kisses them and grabs them. This is sexual assault. And just because they "let you do it" doesn't mean it isn't sexual assault. if you didn't get consent (which he pretty explicitly says he doesn't bother with) then it is sexual assault. Given his numerous sexaul assault allegations, and creepy history (like walking into beauty pageant changing rooms) he isn't even trying to hide the fact that he is a sexual predator. So he really doesn't have any kind of moral high road over other sexual predators.
-->
@HistoryBuff
no, his failure to accomplish anything useful informs his capacity and his competence.
"Useful" is subject to a criteria you've yet to delineate. I can name a useful thing he has done: remove the tax penalty from obamacare's mandate.
about how he was handed a fortune by his father?
Which child doesn't inherit from their parents?
About how he ran a number of businesses into the ground?
Comes with the territory.
About how most of his businesses are now run by other people
Yes, he's wise enough to not micromanage and defer to competent managers.
and he largely just trades on the brand name he managed to make out of his name?
So he managed to turn his name into a commodity and you're trying to convince me that this makes him incompetent?
Trump was basically washed up before the apprentice.
No he wasn't. You can argue that his brand had diminished throughout the years, but he was far from "washed up."
He got onto that show because real business men had better things to do than be on some TV show, so the show creator turned to trump.
Have you spoken with Mark Burnett?
That show managed to convince people that he actually knew something about business. He then built a business around that false impression by selling on his name. The same way he sold on that name and belief that he was competent to run for president.
The show managed to entertain its audience by creating suspense over overly simplified business practices--not to mention Trump's trademarked, "you're fired." The show has international spin-offs and earned Trump $214 million. Looks like good business to me.
no, he's a con man whose con got out in front of him. He wanted to run for president to pump up the name recognition of his brand. He didn't intend to win, he intended to do the only thing he cares about, make himself richer and more famous.
As far as I'm concerned, "politician" and "con-man" are synonymous.
trump has accomplished extremely little in office. He is a really shitty president.What has he got done? He hasn't accomplished anything to do with globalization. He hasn't ended wars. He did manage a tax cut, but it was 99% for the rich and corporations, so not exactly a huge success for most americans. He has succeeded in ballooning the deficit (that the right loves to pretend they care about when democrats are in office, oddly silent about it now). So tell me, what has he accomplished?
He is one of many global managers. He accomplishes that which he is instructed to accomplish.
He "doesn't even wait". he just kisses them and grabs them.
That's not what he said. He said one could grab them by the pussy; he didn't say that he did.
This is sexual assault.
No, it's not.
And just because they "let you do it" doesn't mean it isn't sexual assault.
That's exactly what that means particularly in the absence of duress.
if you didn't get consent (which he pretty explicitly says he doesn't bother with) then it is sexual assault.
And by consent, do you mean expressed verbal confirmation?
Given his numerous sexaul assault allegations
The operative term is "allegation."
and creepy history (like walking into beauty pageant changing rooms)
As I understand it, he owns those pageants, and presumably the buildings in which they are held. He can walk wherever he pleases.
he isn't even trying to hide the fact that he is a sexual predator.
That is an impression you're attempting to project.
So he really doesn't have any kind of moral high road over other sexual predators.
You haven't really substantiated that he is a sexual predator. You've only offered platitudes based on innocuous banter. And once again: I'm not making a moral argument.
-->
@Athias
"Useful" is subject to a criteria you've yet to delineate. I can name a useful thing he has done: remove the tax penalty from obamacare's mandate.
Here's the thing. I don't think obamacare is perfect. It is super flawed. I would have no objection to trump destroying obamacare if he had a workable solution for how to get healthcare to people to replace it. But he has absolutely no plan for that. Not one suggestion. So blowing up the plan in place without doing anything to fix the problem is not useful, it is dangerous.
Which child doesn't inherit from their parents?
i never claimed most don't. Just pointing out that he was handed a successful business empire. It is a very relevant point when people argue he is a great business man.
About how he ran a number of businesses into the ground?Comes with the territory.
of incompetent businessman, yes it does.
Yes, he's wise enough to not micromanage and defer to competent managers.
he is too stupid to run his businesses so he needs much smarter people to do it for him. That's why alot of the ones he ran himself crashed and burned.
So he managed to turn his name into a commodity and you're trying to convince me that this makes him incompetent?
no, i'm saying that his only skill is being a con man. Other people built him up as a businessman genius for their own ends (to sell a tv show and a book). Trump then took their work and managed to con people with it.
The show managed to entertain its audience by creating suspense over overly simplified business practices--not to mention Trump's trademarked, "you're fired." The show has international spin-offs and earned Trump $214 million. Looks like good business to me.
true, the show turned into a success. but not because he is a great business man. He is just a good con man. Trump then used the success of the show to convince people he was a good business man, when he wasnt.
That's not what he said. He said one could grab them by the pussy; he didn't say that he did.
Here is the quote again.
"I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait."
So he just starts kissing them. He doesn't even wait. He just does it. That describes a sexual assault. Especially with his history of things like walking into changing rooms of teenage girls.
That's exactly what that means particularly in the absence of duress.
how do you know there was an absence of duress? He is a rich man and connected. He could ruin someone's career if they said no. That could easily create the conditions of duress.
Given his numerous sexaul assault allegationsThe operative term is "allegation."
no, the operative term is "numerous". People don't build up that many allegations, let alone credible ones, without there being some level of truth to them. Add to that he admits to sexually assaulting women, and that he likes to walk into rooms of teenage girls getting changed.
As I understand it, he owns those pageants, and presumably the buildings in which they are held. He can walk wherever he pleases.
ohh i get it. So he is rich, and therefore he can walk in on naked teenage girls against their will. Thank you for explaining that his wealth means others don't have rights.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Here's the thing. I don't think obamacare is perfect.
Far from it.
It is super flawed. I would have no objection to trump destroying obamacare if he had a workable solution for how to get healthcare to people to replace it. But he has absolutely no plan for that. Not one suggestion.
Good. Let the market handle health care.
So blowing up the plan in place without doing anything to fix the problem is not useful, it is dangerous.
First, what's the problem? Second, how is it dangerous?
i never claimed most don't. Just pointing out that he was handed a successful business empire. It is a very relevant point when people argue he is a great business man.
Whether my father builds me a bike or I built it myself, it wouldn't qualify how good I am at riding that bike.
no, i'm saying that his only skill is being a con man. Other people built him up as a businessman genius for their own ends (to sell a tv show and a book). Trump then took their work and managed to con people with it.
Then why him? If he were a washed up trust-fund baby, why not seek a more competent con-man?
true, the show turned into a success. but not because he is a great business man. He is just a good con man. Trump then used the success of the show to convince people he was a good business man, when he wasnt.
So he was able to successfully sell an idea of himself, and generate tons of commerce from it. Looks like good business to me.
"I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait."So he just starts kissing them. He doesn't even wait. He just does it. That describes a sexual assault.
No it doesn't describe sexual assault.
Especially with his history of things like walking into changing rooms of teenage girls.
Walking into a changing room doesn't describe sexual assault, either.
how do you know there was an absence of duress? He is a rich man and connected. He could ruin someone's career if they said no. That could easily create the conditions of duress.
The absence of duress informs my description. And he could do that which you've stated. But has he? Does he? You haven't substantiated either.
no, the operative term is "numerous". People don't build up that many allegations, let alone credible ones, without there being some level of truth to them. Add to that he admits to sexually assaulting women, and that he likes to walk into rooms of teenage girls getting changed.
And that's the error in your grasp of logical consistency. 52 people can accuse me of raping them, and all 52 claims can be lies. One person can accuse me of rape, and that one allegation can be true. In other words, quantity doesn't qualify veracity. The truth is the truth regardless of how many people tell it, and lie is a lie regardless of how many people tell it. Your ad numerum argument doesn't substantiate your claim that Trump is a sexual predator.
ohh i get it. So he is rich, and therefore he can walk in on naked teenage girls against their will.
It's a relief you understand. There's no possible way you misinterpreted my statements.
Thank you for explaining that his wealth means others don't have rights.
What rights are you talking about? They are in his building, participating in a contest he runs. They can express their discomfort in hopes that he placates them, or they can protest and exit his building--which is their right. Am I leaving anything out?
-->
@Athias
"Cryptic" tweets and botched Easter Egg rolls from three years ago don't count as "dysfunctional." Governments are dysfunctional for reasons beyond Trump.
True, some of the government's dysfunctionality can be attributed to forces beyond Trump. But it takes a special kind of president to reach an 80+% turnover rate in your first term. And this isn't even mentioning the number of vacancies there are. And this also isn't mentioning the number of positions he filled with his family members (blatant nepotism, at best). Good leaders choose good people who are well-suited to the task at hand to get the job done right. Trump has done the opposite of that.
You mean the vanity piece he had ghost written? That's the reason I qualified my question by using the term "intimate."
Well then, what about his tax figures?
Washington, Lincoln, or Kennedy were no Washington, Lincoln, or Kennedy. There's a lot of "mythology" in their legacies.
True, those figures' histories aren't entirely pristine (Washington's complicated affair with slavery, Lincoln's actions in ex parte Milligan, and Kennedy's questionable love affairs, as examples), but they still have done substantially more for the US than Trump has.
So, nothing directly from Trump?
Need something directly from the man himself? Here.
Is that what that was, or are you merely speculating based on your impressions of the NDA?
His lawyer admitted to doing so.
It's not a claim; I'm citing a fact. I've provided enough of a description where you can verify the information on your own. If you need more of a description, you can search, "Joe Biden pinches the nipple of Montana Senator's 8 year-old niece." You can clearly see the girl recoil right after he does it. And it's not his first run-in with a prepubescent girl.
Ok then.
-->
@PressF4Respect
True, some of the government's dysfunctionality can be attributed to forces beyond Trump. But it takes a special kind of president to reach an 80+% turnover rate
How does a turnover rate reflect dysfunctionality?
And this also isn't mentioning the number of positions he filled with his family members (blatant nepotism, at best). Good leaders choose good people who are well-suited to the task at hand to get the job done right. Trump has done the opposite of that.
That works both ways. If you maintain that one should not employ a family member for the sole reason his or her being family, then one ought not to reject employing a family member for the sole reason of his or her being family.
Well then, what about his tax figures?
Where are his practices delineated? The tax figures may indicate how much he lost, but do you know why?
True, those figures' histories aren't entirely pristine (Washington's complicated affair with slavery, Lincoln's actions in ex parte Milligan, and Kennedy's questionable love affairs, as examples), but they still have done substantially more for the US than Trump has.
Like what?
Need something directly from the man himself? Here.
Read the article. He thought he lost because his daughter and son-in-law told him so. So he was "surprised" when he found out that he won.
His lawyer admitted to doing so.
Where in that article does it state that the women he paid off were assaulted or raped? In fact, the article alleges that he had affairs with the women who were paid off. Aren't you just grasping at straws at this point?
Ok then.
So can I then presume that you have watched the videos and the evidence is sufficient?
-->
@Athias
How does a turnover rate reflect dysfunctionality?
"Good leaders choose good people who are well-suited to the task at hand to get the job done right."
Also, it seems like you completely dropped my point on vacancies.
That works both ways. If you maintain that one should not employ a family member for the sole reason his or her being family, then one ought not to reject employing a family member for the sole reason of his or her being family.
I maintain that one (namely, the president) should not employ a family member for the sole reason that it is illegal.
True, those figures' histories aren't entirely pristine (Washington's complicated affair with slavery, Lincoln's actions in ex parte Milligan, and Kennedy's questionable love affairs, as examples), but they still have done substantially more for the US than Trump has.Like what?
George Washington:
- Setting the stage for what all future presidencies would look like (pretty significant)
Abraham Lincoln:
- Ratifying the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments, as well as outlawing slavery (also pretty significant)
John F. Kennedy:
- Averting all-out nuclear war with the Soviet Union, as well as fighting for equal rights for African-Americans and other disenfranchised groups.
Please tell me one thing that Trump has done that is nearly as significant as this.
Read the article. He thought he lost because his daughter and son-in-law told him so. So he was "surprised" when he found out that he won.
Yes, he still thought he lost.
Where in that article does it state that the women he paid off were assaulted or raped? In fact, the article alleges that he had affairs with the women who were paid off. Aren't you just grasping at straws at this point?
Why else would you pay someone $130,000 to not talk about an affair you had with them if it didn't contain any unsavoury stuff in it?
So can I then presume that you have watched the videos and the evidence is sufficient?
I said that because the main focus of this discussion is on Trump, not Biden.
-->
@Athias
Where are his practices delineated? The tax figures may indicate how much he lost, but do you know why?
Please tell me of a successful business strategy where you accumulate $1 billion in debt and have multiple brands completely collapse beneath your feet.
-->
@n8nrgmi
You (and humanity as a whole) have a very poor understanding of every "living thing in the history of the universe." If we can can presume that life has developed anywhere else, there's a fairly good chance that they are more technologically advanced than humans. The Sun of our Solar System is a third-generation star, around 4.5 billion years old. About a billion years after that, the first forms of life developed on Earth. It took most of the remaining 3.5 billion years to get to the point of civilization, and space travel only in the last 60 years.
If a planet could have developed life around first-generation stars 1 billion years after the Big Bang, and it took the same approximate time for that race to develop civilization, then that civilization has approximately 9 billion years headstart against humanity. The average citizen of such a society could be more powerful than Trump, and their government leaders as they might exist would definitely trump Trump.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Good leaders choose good people who are well-suited to the task at hand to get the job done right."Also, it seems like you completely dropped my point on vacancies.
Once again, how does the turnover rate (and vacancies) inform dysfunction? How has the turnover rate and vacancies affect adversely the function of his administration?
I maintain that one (namely, the president) should not employ a family member for the sole reason that it is illegal.
Section 3110 prohibits the appointment of certain persons to positions of em-ployment in the federal government. It is therefore a “provision of law regulating the employment . . . of persons in the Government service.”1 Under section 105(a), the President can exercise his authority to appoint and fix the pay of employees in the White House Office “without regard to” such a law. 3 U.S.C. § 105(a)(1). This authority is “[s]ubject” only to the provisions of subsection (a)(2), which limit the number of White House employees the President may appoint at certain pay levels.See id. § 105(a)(2). Thus, according to the most natural and straightforward reading of section 105(a), the President may appoint relatives as employees in the White House Office “without regard to” the anti-nepotism statute.
George Washington:
- Setting the stage for what all future presidencies would look like (pretty significant)
Abraham Lincoln:
- Ratifying the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments, as well as outlawing slavery (also pretty significant)
John F. Kennedy:
- Averting all-out nuclear war with the Soviet Union, as well as fighting for equal rights for African-Americans and other disenfranchised groups.
Please tell me one thing that Trump has done that is nearly as significant as this.
1. What would presidencies look like after George Washington set the stage?
2. The 14th and 15th amendments were ratified after Lincoln's death. And he only outlawed slavery in the rebellious confederate states. The border states which stayed loyal to the Union were still allowed to practice legal slavery.
3. What were those rights for which he fought among African-Americans and other disenfranchised groups?
And, I'm not trying to boast Trump's presidency. I argue only that he is no worse.
Yes, he still thought he lost.
Yes, but you are extending HistoryBuff's argument that he ran for president thinking he wasn't going to win. Clearly, your cited article does not inform this.
Why else would you pay someone $130,000 to not talk about an affair you had with them if it didn't contain any unsavoury stuff in it?
That is for you to answer and substantiate since you're the one alleging he either sexually assaulted or raped these women.
I said that because the main focus of this discussion is on Trump, not Biden.
So that's a no?
Please tell me of a successful business strategy where you accumulate $1 billion in debt and have multiple brands completely collapse beneath your feet.
How much is he worth?