Kirtland Lang = Alpha = Beaner
@Tusks @walrus I scoped them out, the 3 is really 1
Printable View
Kirtland Lang = Alpha = Beaner
@Tusks @walrus I scoped them out, the 3 is really 1
It's a ruse bud. 1,500-2,000 now deployed to Saudi Arabia and that's after record arms deals. And he thinks they're mercs ffs. Trump had a success story going, soldiers were coming home as gains were cemented very late last year. Fact we held firm with presence and very minimal force speaks to our strength and effectiveness. What he's done here is not only a dishonorable catastrophe it's a reboot for Isis. So much for Obama 'creating Isis', now we get do-overs. 'We're 7k miles away'..seriously what kind of shortsighted Kindergarten thinking is that. President Trump owns this..no one else.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
Indeed he is Commander in Chief and he's acting like it. June 5, 1942 was the last time war was officially declared by Congress and it was against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania. That being said, YES exactly, aren't you dubious to these ambiguous uses of military force? What are we even doing? What's the goal? When can we officially say "Mission Accomplished" let's go home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
50 Special Forces soldiers are going to stop that? That's who we're talking about. 50 people with families, loved ones, friends, etc....we don't want to bring them home because the Kurds?
Trump sent more troops in so as to expedite the ending of the war. Obama let it fester.
The President has addressed a great deal of things, but he's not a dictator, he needs help from the other branches of government. The Congress can declare war if they so choose.....if they so choose.
Wtf is going on with the UN. How much do we spend on them. Seems like they could benefit Syria. If this is so bad, as I said, let it go before Congress, they will just need to decide which groups to declare war on and I wish them luck with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIt's a ruse bud. 1,500-2,000 now deployed to Saudi Arabia and that's after record arms deals. And he thinks they're mercs ffs. Trump had a success story going, soldiers were coming home as gains were cemented very late last year. Fact we held firm with presence and very minimal force speaks to our strength and effectiveness. What he's done here is not only a dishonorable catastrophe it's a reboot for Isis. So much for Obama 'creating Isis', now we get do-overs. 'We're 7k miles away'..seriously what kind of shortsighted Kindergarten thinking is that. President Trump owns this..no one else.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIndeed he is Commander in Chief and he's acting like it. June 5, 1942 was the last time war was officially declared by Congress and it was against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania. That being said, YES exactly, aren't you dubious to these ambiguous uses of military force? What are we even doing? What's the goal? When can we officially say "Mission Accomplished" let's go home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
50 Special Forces soldiers are going to stop that? That's who we're talking about. 50 people with families, loved ones, friends, etc....we don't want to bring them home because the Kurds?
Trump sent more troops in so as to expedite the ending of the war. Obama let it fester.
The President has addressed a great deal of things, but he's not a dictator, he needs help from the other branches of government. The Congress can declare war if they so choose.....if they so choose.
Say one positive thing about him Spicoli. I challenge you. I bet even Jack the Ripper had a nice accent.
I have before and just have...he had success going. Shoot I'd give a fiver for fervent supporters to simply defend-promote some domestic policies. You see nothing on that front. It's all Obama Drama and they, them, those dudes, back when annnnnd her e mails. He's actually a terrible salesman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
We didn't need a declaration of war to achieve with extreme minimal loss what we did. We just pooched it.Quote:
Originally Posted by walrusWtf is going on with the UN. How much do we spend on them. Seems like they could benefit Syria. If this is so bad, as I said, let it go before Congress, they will just need to decide which groups to declare war on and I wish them luck with thatQuote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliIt's a ruse bud. 1,500-2,000 now deployed to Saudi Arabia and that's after record arms deals. And he thinks they're mercs ffs. Trump had a success story going, soldiers were coming home as gains were cemented very late last year. Fact we held firm with presence and very minimal force speaks to our strength and effectiveness. What he's done here is not only a dishonorable catastrophe it's a reboot for Isis. So much for Obama 'creating Isis', now we get do-overs. 'We're 7k miles away'..seriously what kind of shortsighted Kindergarten thinking is that. President Trump owns this..no one else.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongIndeed he is Commander in Chief and he's acting like it. June 5, 1942 was the last time war was officially declared by Congress and it was against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania. That being said, YES exactly, aren't you dubious to these ambiguous uses of military force? What are we even doing? What's the goal? When can we officially say "Mission Accomplished" let's go home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
50 Special Forces soldiers are going to stop that? That's who we're talking about. 50 people with families, loved ones, friends, etc....we don't want to bring them home because the Kurds?
Trump sent more troops in so as to expedite the ending of the war. Obama let it fester.
The President has addressed a great deal of things, but he's not a dictator, he needs help from the other branches of government. The Congress can declare war if they so choose.....if they so choose.
I think he is flawed for sure, but I think he is doing positive things too. Immigration is seemingly coming down, he hasn't full on decimated a region of the world yet, and he does seem to get the totalitarian menace of China. Stop them flooding in...they don't let you flood in! Admittedly it is a low bar when you are saying 'He hasn't killed hundreds of thousands', but it is true. I have a lot of criticisms too, but the total negativity is just unrealistic for me. His policy on immigration for instance is pretty much how things were just a few decades ago and you get hysteria about concentration camps that is untrue.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpicoliI have before and just have...he had success going. Shoot I'd give a fiver for fervent supporters to simply defend-promote some domestic policies. You see nothing on that front. It's all Obama Drama and they, them, those dudes, back when annnnnd her e mails. He's actually a terrible salesman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
I think we have to compare with what went before too. And both sides have been pretty repulsive for a long time now. If Trump was serious he would roll back the police state mechanisms, but he doesn't.
Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are examining Rudy Giuliani’s business dealings in Ukraine, including his finances, meetings and work for a city mayor there, according to people familiar with the matter.
Investigators also have examined Giuliani’s bank records, according to the people.
Witnesses have been questioned about Giuliani since at least August by investigators, who also want to know more about Giuliani’s role in an alleged conspiracy involving two of his business associates, the people said. The investigation is being led by the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of New York.
Giuliani has denied wrongdoing and on Monday said he hadn’t been informed of any investigation. “They can look at my Ukraine business all they want,” he said.
It couldn’t be determined how far along the investigation stands. The scope of the inquiry also isn’t known. Since April 2018, Giuliani has been President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, work for which he isn’t paid.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/federal...2100?mod=e2twp
President Donald Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, was paid $500,000 for work he did for a company co-founded by the Ukrainian-American businessman arrested last week on campaign finance charges, Giuliani told Reuters on Monday.
The businessman, Lev Parnas, is a close associate of Giuliani and was involved in his effort to investigate Trump’s political rival, former Vice President Joe Biden, who is a leading contender for the 2020 Democratic Party nomination.
Giuliani said Parnas’ company, Boca Raton-based Fraud Guarantee, whose website says it aims to help clients “reduce and mitigate fraud”, engaged Giuliani Partners, a management and security consulting firm, around August 2018. Giuliani said he was hired to consult on Fraud Guarantee’s technologies and provide legal advice on regulatory issues.
Federal prosecutors are “examining Giuliani’s interactions” with Parnas and another Giuliani associate, Igor Fruman, who was also indicted on campaign finance charges, a law enforcement source told Reuters on Sunday.
The New York Times reported last week that Parnas had told associates he paid Giuliani hundreds of thousands of dollars for what Giuliani said was business and legal advice. Giuliani said for the first time on Monday that the total amount was $500,000.
Giuliani told Reuters the money came in two payments made within weeks of each other. He said he could not recall the dates of the payments. He said most of the work he did for Fraud Guarantee was completed in 2018 but that he had been doing follow-up for over a year.
Parnas and Fruman were arrested at Dulles Airport outside Washington last week on charges they funneled foreign money to unnamed U.S. politicians in a bid to influence U.S.-Ukraine relations in violation of U.S. campaign finance laws. The men were preparing to board a plane to Europe.
According to an indictment unsealed by U.S. prosecutors, an unidentified Russian businessman arranged for two $500,000 wires to be sent from foreign bank accounts to a U.S. account controlled by Fruman in September and October 2018. The money was used, in part, by Fruman, Parnas and two other men charged in the indictment to gain influence with U.S. politicians and candidates, the indictment said.
Foreign nationals are prohibited from making contributions and other expenditures in connection with U.S. elections, and from making contributions in someone else’s name.
Giuliani said he was confident that the money he received was from “a domestic source,” but he would not say where it came from.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1WU07Z
The White House’s former top Russia adviser told impeachment investigators that Giuliani ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit Trump
Fiona Hill, the White House’s former top Russia adviser, told impeachment investigators on Monday that Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, ran a shadow foreign policy in Ukraine that circumvented U.S. officials and career diplomats in order to personally benefit President Trump, according to people familiar with her testimony.
Hill, who served as the senior official for Russia and Europe on the National Security Council, was the latest witness in a fast-moving impeachment inquiry focused on whether the president abused his office by using the promise of military aid and diplomatic support to pressure Ukraine into investigating his political rivals.
In a closed-door session that lasted roughly 10 hours, Hill told lawmakers that she confronted Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, about Giuliani’s activities which, she testified, were not coordinated with the officials responsible for carrying out U.S. foreign policy, these people said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to disclose details of her deposition.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...4aa_story.html
WASHINGTON — The effort to pressure Ukraine for political help provoked a heated confrontation inside the White House last summer that so alarmed John R. Bolton, then the national security adviser, that he told an aide to alert White House lawyers, House investigators were told on Monday.
Mr. Bolton got into a tense exchange on July 10 with Gordon D. Sondland, the Trump donor turned ambassador to the European Union, who was working with Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, to press Ukraine to investigate Democrats, according to three people who heard the testimony.
The aide, Fiona Hill, testified that Mr. Bolton told her to notify the chief lawyer for the National Security Council about a rogue effort by Mr. Sondland, Mr. Giuliani and Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, according to the people familiar the testimony.
“I am not part of whatever drug deal Sondland and Mulvaney are cooking up,” Mr. Bolton, a Yale-trained lawyer, told Ms. Hill to tell White House lawyers, according to two people at the deposition. (Another person in the room initially said Mr. Bolton referred to Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Mulvaney, but two others said he cited Mr. Sondland.)
It was not the first time Mr. Bolton expressed grave concerns to Ms. Hill about the campaign being run by Mr. Giuliani. “Giuliani’s a hand grenade who’s going to blow everybody up,” Ms. Hill quoted Mr. Bolton as saying during an earlier conversation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/14/u...testimony.html
This lines from the indictment should keep Parnas/Fruman & Giuliani up at night: 1-sounds SO colludy 2-SDNY has their private words in some way & form 3-who’s the “individual”?
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EGr0LfPW4AQJx_K.jpg
7:27 am - 12 Oct 2019 https://twitter.com/Mimirocah1/statu...26335809265666
Oh no an investigation into someone aligned with Trump surely this will spell the end of Drumpf :rolleyes:
To quote George W Bush
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A
There was never a realistic chance that the Mueller investigation would reach Trump and I never claimed otherwise despite you claiming in almost every post that I was. It wasn't like he was going to release a transcript of a phone call offering taxpayer dollars in return for a foreign power fixing the 2016 election. Most of his senior campaign team got swept up in the criminal investigation though. And judging by the polls at least three of those Democrats have a ten point lead over trump so clearly the American electorate think some people have a chance of beating him. You're aware Trump is a historically unpopular president and is losing by ten points to multiple Democratic condenders, right? That's currently on the shelf?Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongYeah a year ago...a year ago Comey and Mueller was supposed to spell the end of evil Trump and .....wait a second he's STILL President. What happened indeed Kirkland? Perhaps you're the best one to venture a guess about that...have at it, guess away tell us when the impeachment will be done and when.....what Biden runs against him? Are you a Biden guy? You're not seriously thinking ANY of these Democrats stand even the slightest chance of winning do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
1. IF Trump actually said that and I've got my doubts, then he shouldn't have said that, but he's known to have a way with words and sometimes certain people....you know the kind....get the wrong idea. I think it's quite likely you misheard or misinterpreted what Trump has said.
Oh Trump is allowed to investigate his opponents he's just got to do it the proper way which is via the FBI, DOJ, etc.....so AG Barr being involved should change your opinion of this then, AG Barr is as AG head of the DOJ after all. And if the FBI corruptly attempted to torpedo his Presidency why would Trump place ANY faith in them?
2. Trump's kids running the Trump family business....wow so corrupt it's not like they did that their entire lives. Also the context to those pictures paints quite a different picture than The Biden's with a Ukrainian oil magnate on a golf course before Hunter gets his job with Burisma and VP Biden is "gifted" the job of dealing with Ukraine...but hey if it was no big deal it was no big deal and it's not like similar shit would have happened with China AND Hunter Biden's Chinese counterpart wouldn't have been busted in a corruption scandal over there....oh wait.
Kirk, you're awfully fussy about Trump. So what's the deal? Is he making life harder for you or do you just don't like him? I have to say his presidency getting you so riled up has been well worth it already.
OK then yeah don't worry about the FISA court abuses....we'll see what happens ;D
Lyle, I posted the fucking court filing that specifically says Trump considers himself above the law two days ago. Either you read it and it fell off your little shelf within 48 hours or you didn't even read my post. Here it is again Lyle:
Trump tried to stop his accountants from complying with the subpoena by seeking an injunction, claiming that as long as he is in office, he’s above the law. I’m not exaggerating. Trump’s lawyers argued that while in office, Trump “enjoys absolute immunity from criminal process of any kind.”
This goes way beyond not being able to indict a sitting president. As the court noted, Trump was seeking a “virtually limitless” sphere of protection that would prevent everything from prosecution to even investigating him for possible crimes while in office. And astoundingly, Trump even claimed this king-like immunity would also apply to third parties that are in possession of Trump’s information, like his accountants at Mazars, or to his “associates, or relatives who may have collaborated with the president in committing purportedly unlawful acts.” (Trump’s lawyers conceded that no court had afforded a sitting president this much immunity before.)
Judge Marrero was not having any of this, slamming Trump’s goal as being “repugnant to the nation's governmental structure and constitutional values.” He wrote bluntly that Trump’s very argument was one that would place him “above the law” as President, a notion “that the Founders rejected at the inception of the Republic, and that the Supreme Court has since unequivocally repudiated.”
See the link in the post? You can read the actual court filing, the judge's description of Trump's lawyers' case and their actual filing itself. So I'm not mishearing anything, it's written down. And I'm not misinterpreting the court filing, it's right there. Can we both agree that Trump is incorrect when he claims he's immune from even being investigated and that anybody he's associated with is also covered by that immunity? Can you just answer this now please instead of me having to keep asking?
There's zero evidence that the FBI corruptly tried to end his presidency. There's endless evidence that they correctly investigated a bunch of illegal actions by the Trump campaign.
Trump's kids are running a business that the president shouldn't own while he's in office to prevent conflicts of interest. Presidents have since the end of WW2 sold anything they have a business interest in to prevent confluicts of interest occuring. Jimmy Carter even had to sell his peanut farm. Trump won't divest anything and has his kids running round the world starting new business ventures and unlike any prez for half a century won't release his tax returns so nobody can see who is paying him for what. The Hunter Biden thing is nothing by comparison.
Your latest Hunter Biden claim is also bullshit. That isn't a Ukrainian gas executive in the photograph. This has already been posted but has already fallen off your little shelf. It's a real disadvantage not having a memory better than a goldfish when it comes to argung something complicated, isn't it Lyle?
https://twitter.com/Yair_Rosenberg/s...07564486303745
Here's a rundown of some of the Trump family conflicts of interest. None of these fuckers have released their tax returns either.
https://www.gq.com/story/trump-kids-profit-presidency
Would you like to put a date on this "see what happens" bullshit? An actual date when if there are no arrests of all these deep state people, like for instance:Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongNope, not yet. But you know what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
We'll see what happens
https://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfo...52#post1515752
the people you mention in this post, you'll admit you were wrong? You mentioned election day 2020 before. Are we still good for that date?
Oh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
*By listening to idiots on a Russian propaganda channel, the twenty first century version of Pravda. Ffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingOh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking* in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
Why should I put a date on these things? It ain't like I'm actively working on the case Kirk. Just let it play out and watch what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I don't know when things will happen...heck even the Horowitz IG report is tentatively scheduled for release on the 18th....it's not set in stone. The wheels of justice can move very slow sometimes and you seem extraordinarily impatient for some reason.
....again, why? What is your beef? You're very emotional about all of this it seems unhealthy....do you need to talk? Not only are you unreasonably abrasive towards me, but it seems as though Donald Trump has personally injured you some how.
http://giphygifs.s3.amazonaws.com/me...LMPe/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Kirkland at can’t believe you have several divorces. A nice open minded guy like you, who would have thunkQuote:
Originally Posted by El KabongWhy should I put a date on these things? It ain't like I'm actively working on the case Kirk. Just let it play out and watch what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I don't know when things will happen...heck even the Horowitz IG report is tentatively scheduled for release on the 18th....it's not set in stone. The wheels of justice can move very slow sometimes and you seem extraordinarily impatient for some reason.
....again, why? What is your beef? You're very emotional about all of this it seems unhealthy....do you need to talk? Not only are you unreasonably abrasive towards me, but it seems as though Donald Trump has personally injured you some how.
http://giphygifs.s3.amazonaws.com/me...LMPe/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
😆😆😆😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
But I was completely right, wasn't I? I said they would never raise interest rates to normal rates again snd you mocked me much as you do Lyle. Where did interest rates rise to and where are they headed? Out here they will be at record lows of 1% come spring. My forecasts have been pretty good considering some super elite chap said I was wrong. They never normalized interest rates did they? And you know they cannot now. Hole. Dug. Deep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingOh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
The wizard member of our Lord of the rings gang has completely annihilated kirtland
Which sources have integrity according to the elite mastermind Kirk? The BBC? CNN? The New York Times? Pfft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing*By listening to idiots on a Russian propaganda channel, the twenty first century version of Pravda. Ffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingOh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking* in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
@kirtland gets roasted Hobbit toes again!
RT is good as it actually has on people the mainstream won't bother with due to 3 minute soundbites or ideological divergence. When was the last time Finkelstein was on CNN? Or Noam Chomsky? They are effectively deplatformed in mainstream society.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatboxingfan
All that BS about climate change and then adverts promoting luxury air travel. What is that dingbat Brit with glasses who promotes air travel all about too? His voice is appalling. Here he is. Muppet.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rV1-BF3zh1o
Give me RT anyday of the week. BBC and CNN are fake news. Panorama trying to set up a 'sex thing' and crap like the BBC hounding Johnson Me Too style with no interest in policies. Total smearing nonsense.
Zero divorces. Zero marriages. One son.Quote:
Originally Posted by walrusKirkland at can’t believe you have several divorces. A nice open minded guy like you, who would have thunkQuote:
Originally Posted by El KabongWhy should I put a date on these things? It ain't like I'm actively working on the case Kirk. Just let it play out and watch what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I don't know when things will happen...heck even the Horowitz IG report is tentatively scheduled for release on the 18th....it's not set in stone. The wheels of justice can move very slow sometimes and you seem extraordinarily impatient for some reason.
....again, why? What is your beef? You're very emotional about all of this it seems unhealthy....do you need to talk? Not only are you unreasonably abrasive towards me, but it seems as though Donald Trump has personally injured you some how.
http://giphygifs.s3.amazonaws.com/me...LMPe/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Hang on a minute Miles, how about the years and years you spent predicting hyperinflation, soaring interest rates and so on? I can't remember mocking you for saying that interest rates would never be raised. Perhaps you could provide examples. I remember lots of mocking over hyperinflation claims. Do you seriously want me to search for some of the shit you were coming out with for years?Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfBut I was completely right, wasn't I? I said they would never raise interest rates to normal rates again snd you mocked me much as you do Lyle. Where did interest rates rise to and where are they headed? Out here they will be at record lows of 1% come spring. My forecasts have been pretty good considering some super elite chap said I was wrong. They never normalized interest rates did they? And you know they cannot now. Hole. Dug. Deep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingOh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
Interest rates are a function of supply and demand. Let's say the top one percent own a vast chunk of all the money and are looking to invest it in stocks/bonds/financial assets but there's no demand in the real economy because the ninety nine percent don't have any money. Huge supply of money and no demand for it from firms to make investments because no demand for their products and services because the ninety nine percent are skint. That means money is cheap/low interest rates. This scenario is where we are right now.
How to fix this? To "normalise" rates? Simply redistribute national income. Direct more of the national income to the ninety nine percent and less to the one percent. Increased demand from the ninety nine means increased demand for capital which reduces the supply of cash available from the one percent. Reduce their supply even more by taxing the fuckers and investing that money into the real economy. All of a sudden demand for cash starts to equal supply. And as a bonus you have an actual booming economy and broadly shared prosperity. Central banks have to raise rates to deal with inflation caused by a booming economy. Problem solved.
Of course since the one percent have a hammerlock on policy and have no intention of reducing their income/wealth the current fucked up situation will continue for the forseeable.
Here's the thing though Lyle. The wheels of justice aren't moving at all. There are no investigations, no grand juries, nothing. If your ridiculous conspiracy theory was true it would be using a huge chunk of the justice system yet none of the justice system is being used to investigate any deep staters.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongWhy should I put a date on these things? It ain't like I'm actively working on the case Kirk. Just let it play out and watch what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I don't know when things will happen...heck even the Horowitz IG report is tentatively scheduled for release on the 18th....it's not set in stone. The wheels of justice can move very slow sometimes and you seem extraordinarily impatient for some reason.
....again, why? What is your beef? You're very emotional about all of this it seems unhealthy....do you need to talk? Not only are you unreasonably abrasive towards me, but it seems as though Donald Trump has personally injured you some how.
http://giphygifs.s3.amazonaws.com/me...LMPe/giphy.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
If there was anything going on it would be the biggest story ever. Ever Lyle. Yet not one single media outlet is reporting anything. Not even Fox News Lyle. Even the regime broadcaster won't touch it. Not even Hannity. Why is this Lyle? Because it doesn't exist you daft bugger.
What you are looking at is the most lawless president in history turning America into a banana republic and nobody in the government doing much in the way of stopping him. It's unmissable car crash stuff, truly historic. I can't not comment on it. I always thought once the current power structure started losing their grip they'd abandon democracy but to see it unfold in real time day after day is a sight to see.
And the questions you keep refusing to answer:
1. Can we both agree that Trump is incorrect when he claims he's immune from even being investigated and that anybody he's associated with is also covered by that immunity?
[NB. If you don't believe that he's claiming this check back a page or so, it's fallen off your little shelf again.]
2. Trump is claiming he has the right to investigate anybody he wants if he believes they're corrupt. Do you agree with this?
[Same thing.]
* I didn't explain this well. Try again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingHang on a minute Miles, how about the years and years you spent predicting hyperinflation, soaring interest rates and so on? I can't remember mocking you for saying that interest rates would never be raised. Perhaps you could provide examples. I remember lots of mocking over hyperinflation claims. Do you seriously want me to search for some of the shit you were coming out with for years?Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfBut I was completely right, wasn't I? I said they would never raise interest rates to normal rates again snd you mocked me much as you do Lyle. Where did interest rates rise to and where are they headed? Out here they will be at record lows of 1% come spring. My forecasts have been pretty good considering some super elite chap said I was wrong. They never normalized interest rates did they? And you know they cannot now. Hole. Dug. Deep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingOh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
Interest rates are a function of supply and demand. Let's say the top one percent own a vast chunk of all the money and are looking to invest it in stocks/bonds/financial assets but there's no demand in the real economy because the ninety nine percent don't have any money. Huge supply of money and no demand for it from firms to make investments because no demand for their products and services because the ninety nine percent are skint. That means money is cheap/low interest rates. This scenario is where we are right now.
How to fix this? To "normalise" rates? Simply redistribute national income. Direct more of the national income to the ninety nine percent and less to the one percent. Increased demand from the ninety nine means increased demand for capital which reduces the supply of cash available from the one percent. Reduce their supply even more by taxing the fuckers and investing that money into the real economy. All of a sudden demand for cash starts to equal supply*. And as a bonus you have an actual booming economy and broadly shared prosperity. Central banks have to raise rates to deal with inflation caused by a booming economy. Problem solved.
Of course since the one percent have a hammerlock on policy and have no intention of reducing their income/wealth the current fucked up situation will continue for the forseeable.
Lots of cash piled up in banks, whoever owns it, and no demand for cash from businesses means banks are desperate to lend it and will lend at superlow rates. An increased demand for loans means interest rates go up as there is competition for the amount of money banks have to lend so banks can charge higher rates for their cash. If you want to create increased demand you have to redistribute national income into the pockets of people who will spend it. Them spending it is that increased demand. Firms need to borrow to be able to invest to cater for that demand and you get a virtuous economic cycle. We don't get good economic expansions anymore because the economy is so badly deformed due to forty years of upward redistribution. We need a massive downward redistribution of wealth to fix the economy. Don't hold your breath.
That's the whole fucked up economic situation in a nutshell. And if you care to check I've been making these exact points for ten years now. They get truer every day.
OK, if you say so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Oh I'm quite sure you know a great deal more about the situation than I do. You must be correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
OK if that's how you see it there's nothing I'm going to post that will change your mind ergo "We'll see what happens" has become my default response. Even if I agreed with you (which I don't) we'd still have to see how everything plays out because we don't have a say in the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I've answered your questions as much as they've deserved to be answered and you can keep asking, but I'll just refer you back to what I've previously posted. I'm sorry you find those answers unacceptable, but those are the answers so, best of luck :thumb:
And I see another known associate of Giuliani was arrested today at JFK. It's not known whether this guy was also one of Trump's legal representatives in Ukraine along with those two Russian mobsters who were arrested at Dulles trying to flee the country a few days ago. This I think means there are now six current or former Trump lawyers/legal representatives either in prison or under indictment/criminal investigation. How long before people start looking at their common denominator?
You haven't answered either question which is why I'm still asking. It's a yes or no answer Lyle. Is the president above the law? Yes or no. You can't even answer that. Shameful.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongOK, if you say so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Oh I'm quite sure you know a great deal more about the situation than I do. You must be correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
OK if that's how you see it there's nothing I'm going to post that will change your mind ergo "We'll see what happens" has become my default response. Even if I agreed with you (which I don't) we'd still have to see how everything plays out because we don't have a say in the matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I've answered your questions as much as they've deserved to be answered and you can keep asking, but I'll just refer you back to what I've previously posted. I'm sorry you find those answers unacceptable, but those are the answers so, best of luck :thumb:
This surely will be the beginning of the end for the evil Drumpf :rolleyes: The walls are closing in now.....any moment.....wait for it.....wait for it...... :shakehead:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
Your country is a banana republic and you seem quite happy about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongThis surely will be the beginning of the end for the evil Drumpf :rolleyes: The walls are closing in now.....any moment.....wait for it.....wait for it...... :shakehead:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
And a yes or no answer Lyle. Is Trump above the law or not?
We'll see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I've already answered that.
Hyperinflation did not occur. Unlike you or Beanz I can admit when a prediction does not materialize. The printed money stayed in the hands of a few and they kept it to themselves. However, there is also a reason why even a standard house in the North of England (hardly the South East) is 250-300% more costly than it was 25 years ago and why wages have not kept up. Groceries might not have gone up but some things have inflated horrendously. Ever taken the train? Or bought a beer? Very expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingHang on a minute Miles, how about the years and years you spent predicting hyperinflation, soaring interest rates and so on? I can't remember mocking you for saying that interest rates would never be raised. Perhaps you could provide examples. I remember lots of mocking over hyperinflation claims. Do you seriously want me to search for some of the shit you were coming out with for years?Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfBut I was completely right, wasn't I? I said they would never raise interest rates to normal rates again snd you mocked me much as you do Lyle. Where did interest rates rise to and where are they headed? Out here they will be at record lows of 1% come spring. My forecasts have been pretty good considering some super elite chap said I was wrong. They never normalized interest rates did they? And you know they cannot now. Hole. Dug. Deep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingOh Miles, after becoming an instant expert on finance and banking in the wake of the 2008 meltdown and then finding out everything you thought would happen was completely and utterly wrong and having to accept I actually knew what I was talking about you're now reduced to the occasional bout of passive agressive bitching when something I say gets you upset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
It's like getting texts from one of my exes. Don't you realise how stupid you look going out with girls half your age. That girl you're going out with now is really trashy. It's obvious she's had work done. I'm much prettier than she is. I've got more insta followers than she has.
Interest rates are a function of supply and demand. Let's say the top one percent own a vast chunk of all the money and are looking to invest it in stocks/bonds/financial assets but there's no demand in the real economy because the ninety nine percent don't have any money. Huge supply of money and no demand for it from firms to make investments because no demand for their products and services because the ninety nine percent are skint. That means money is cheap/low interest rates. This scenario is where we are right now.
How to fix this? To "normalise" rates? Simply redistribute national income. Direct more of the national income to the ninety nine percent and less to the one percent. Increased demand from the ninety nine means increased demand for capital which reduces the supply of cash available from the one percent. Reduce their supply even more by taxing the fuckers and investing that money into the real economy. All of a sudden demand for cash starts to equal supply. And as a bonus you have an actual booming economy and broadly shared prosperity. Central banks have to raise rates to deal with inflation caused by a booming economy. Problem solved.
Of course since the one percent have a hammerlock on policy and have no intention of reducing their income/wealth the current fucked up situation will continue for the forseeable.
So basically you have a society of debtors and any increase in interest rates means people who bought what they cannot afford go under. Meanwhile you bring in hundreds of thousands of migrants every year thus squeezing more. It is an absurd and phomy system.
I think you kind of prove my point on inflation too. The stock market has risen massively as have property prices, the inflation has been in things ordinary people cannot compete with. A mortgage today is how many times more than income? Where is the stock market? That's massive inflation. The ordinary person cannot compete and generally companies do not provide pensions anymore and people are mostly spending for today. A lack of common sense there too, but the printed money goes to the elite first of all and at rates nobody else can have. The inflation for ordinary things did not occur because wages etc have been kept down and the money was kept away from ordinary society.
The stock market is not the economy. It's a small number of people betting on speculative assets. Has no bearing on prices in the real economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The housing market is the way it is due to Britain having the most restrictive planning regulations of any major economy. It's supply and demand causing house price rises, nothing to do with printing money or any kind of monetary or fiscal policy that central banks or governments have engaged in.
Ten years you've been an instant expert on finance and economics and you're still repeating the same obvious nonsense you were ten years ago.
It's a yes or no answer and you refuse to say no. You clearly think Trump is above the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongWe'll see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I've already answered that.
I answered already, what you choose to do now is up to you and I'm sure I don't care about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingIt's a yes or no answer and you refuse to say no. You clearly think Trump is above the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongWe'll see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I've already answered that.
Hey how's that whole impeachment process coming along by the by?
Fucking Fred is not playing today but you get the idea. Imagine what it would look like going back to 2000 showing the 2008 drop. Bottom line, low stable inflation and volatile stock market. No connection between the two. Maybe the graph helps make it obvious.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/fredgraph.png?g=pbHZ
You can't bring yourself to admit that Trump isn't above the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongI answered already, what you choose to do now is up to you and I'm sure I don't care about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland LaingIt's a yes or no answer and you refuse to say no. You clearly think Trump is above the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongWe'll see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing
I've already answered that.
Hey how's that whole impeachment process coming along by the by?