OFFICIAL: Donald Trump thread.

[1bad65]

I want to know, for example, how much of Trump's wealth is invested in Exxon and their partners. Why?

Tax returns will not show that information.

Because he nominated Tillerson for Sec of State. Tillerson has a very favorable view of Russia. He could recommend dropping sanctions against Russia which would allow Exxon to drill in Russia. This could be worth almost a $1 trillion dollars.

Could, could, could.

We've been over this many, many times. Stick to actual actions, please.

edit: I was surprised by how many of his supporters didn't care about his tax return given many of them are up in arms about corruption in government.

Um, he wasn't in Government during the time of the tax returns in question. Remember Dunn, he's not a political lifer like the rest are.

So there, you answered your own question.

[1bad65]

Ok, how do feel about this change? As I stated in my initial post this premium seems to affect his voting base more so than anyone else.

I'll be glad to take a stab at that, but I'd first like you to clarify you were mistaken about President Trump raising taxes.

[The Big Dunn]

Tax returns will not show that information.



Could, could, could.

We've been over this many, many times. Stick to actual actions, please.



Um, he wasn't in Government during the time of the tax returns in question. Remember Dunn, he's not a political lifer like the rest are.

So there, you answered your own question.

Could may not be important to you and that is fine. Could is important to me. I use information on previous behavior to as a predictor of future behavior..

There is ample evidence available that Tillerson will profit significantly from Exxon being allowed to drill in Russia if sanctions are lifted. I do not think it is smart to give someone a position where they can make a decision that increase their personal wealth by hundreds of millions of dollars. If you see it differently, that is fine.

I think rich people that stand to profit from their decisions are far more susceptible to corruption, particularly DeVos and Tillerson, who both stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars with policy decisions they make.

[The Big Dunn]

I'll be glad to take a stab at that, but I'd first like you to clarify you were mistaken about President Trump raising taxes.

I never claimed he raised taxes, I posted he got rid of a credit. You posted it was a premium. I said ok.

If you choose not to answer that is fine with me.

[The Big Dunn]

Did I say that?

I'm saying how the demographics of the area where the event was held probably gave Obama a boost.

I am not so sure about that but ok.

[1bad65]

Could may not be important to you and that is fine. Could is important to me. I use information on previous behavior to as a predictor of future behavior..

Whatever Dunn. You can live by 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' when you have nothing left. I really dont care.

But you can't direct me to where you expressed this same concern for players on Team D about what they "might" or "could" do, can you?

There is ample evidence available that Tillerson will profit significantly from Exxon being allowed to drill in Russia if sanctions are lifted.

And there's ample evidence lifer politicians HAVE prospered significantly from laws/policies they voted for.

Again, where's your outrage for Team D players doing this?

I do not think it is smart to give someone a position where they can make a decision that increase their personal wealth by hundreds of millions of dollars. If you see it differently, that is fine.

"they can". Yup, more conjecture.

But again I ask, where are your posts showing your outrage for Hillary Clinton who did really acquire $150 million in personal wealth while in office as a public "servant"?

I think rich people that stand to profit from their decisions are far more susceptible to corruption, particularly DeVos and Tillerson, who both stand to make hundreds of millions of dollars with policy decisions they make.

And non-rich folks cant????

Again, how do all these lifers get loaded in office if they aren't doing what you are suddenly now condemning now that Team D isn't in the White House?

You may make good points, but you lose all credibility unless you can provide as I asked examples of you calling out players on Team D for the very behavior you're complaining that guys on Team R might be going to do.....

[Rudyo]

I am no longer paying attention to politics, so pm your boy Rudyo if something cool/bad/sweet stuff happens.

Thanks guys.

[1bad65]

I never claimed he raised taxes, I posted he got rid of a credit. You posted it was a premium. I said ok.

If you choose not to answer that is fine with me.

You called me a liar for doing this, don't be a hypocrite please. Here is your quote, notice the word "tax credit" was used by you.

The 1st thing Trump did after being inaugurated was to get rid of the tax credit Obama initiated for homeowners whose mortgages are $200k or less.

I'll answer, but only if you show you are engaging in debate/discourse with an open mind and being intellectually honest. I think you are, just want it confirmed.

And if you've not noticed, notice I called this a "mistake" on your end, and asked you for clarification politely. When I did something like this last week, you immediately called me a "liar".....

[The Big Dunn]

Whatever Dunn. You can live by 'woulda, coulda, shoulda' when you have nothing left. I really dont care.

But you can't direct me to where you expressed this same concern for players on Team D about what they "might" or "could" do, can you?



And there's ample evidence lifer politicians HAVE prospered significantly from laws/policies they voted for.

Again, where's your outrage for Team D players doing this?



"they can". Yup, more conjecture.

But again I ask, where are your posts showing your outrage for Hillary Clinton who did really acquire $150 million in personal wealth while in office as a public "servant"?



And non-rich folks cant????

Again, how do all these lifers get loaded in office if they aren't doing what you are suddenly now condemning now that Team D isn't in the White House?

You may make good points, but you lose all credibility unless you can provide as I asked examples of you calling out players on Team D for the very behavior you're complaining that guys on Team R might be going to do.....

Thats because threads haven't come up about them. For example, I didn't vote for Jon Corzine, democratic Gov for NJ, because he was uber wealthy, worth about $750 mil when he left Goldman Sachs. These things matter to me whether or not it comes up for discussion on NSB.

There is not ample evidence that a Democrat (or Republican) Sec of State stands to make hundreds of millions dollars from a policy decision as there is in this case. Please stop over exaggerating things just to try and fit them into your argument.

If you don't care about the possible consequences of your decisions, thats fine with me. I think its always smart to game out all possibilities.

Why would I need to express outrage there to validate my concern here? I didn't express outrage over Bush either. I am not generally concerned that people who have chosen a life in public service profit from it, regardless of affiliation.

However, also regardless of party affiliation, I am always concerned when someone leaves a multi million dollar job for a public sector job and takes a 90% paycut.

I am concerned about making the CEO of Exxon the secretary of State of the US. I expressed concern over DeVos and I previously expressed concern over appointing Sessions as AG and Carson as HUD Secretary. I gave my reasons.

[The Big Dunn]

You called me a liar for doing this, don't be a hypocrite please. Here is your quote, notice the word "tax credit" was used by you.



I'll answer, but only if you show you are engaging in debate/discourse with an open mind and being intellectually honest. I think you are, just want it confirmed.

And if you've not noticed, notice I called this a "mistake" on your end, and asked you for clarification politely. When I did something like this last week, you immediately called me a "liar".....

You posted you didn't use the word debate when you did. I posted I never claimed he raised taxes, which I didn't. I posted he got rid of a tax credit. You said it was premium, I said ok and didn't suggest otherwise.

I don't care if you answer or not.