***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Bill Gates is kinda full of it. Warren's wealth tax would not wipe out his fortune or come close.

Dude is peddling hyperbole to try to push the angle that she is asking for too much.

The best argument fir a wealth tax is that we already tax houses and other real property. Plus, it is much easier to get returns from your 51st million dollar than it is to get income from your primary residence.

home owners have to tap into their earned income or their retirement income. If you have cash or financial instruments that are worth more than 50 million, you are beyond foolish if your not getting at least more than 2%. This means that even with the wealth tax, your net worth should still grow just more slowly than before.

if anything the wealth tax should be at 6% and the cap should be 10 million. It’s right below the historic returns on stocks but it does mean that during economic downturns, your rate of return would be below 6% and you’d have to sell of some if your principal to cover the tax. It would mean that the 1% would be less keen on austerity since they could lose money during recessions.
 
Brazilians March Against Bolsonaro and his Ties to Murder of Activist

The anti-Bolsonaro marches come amid extremely concerning revelations, which allegedly tie the president to the murder of the councilwoman and LGBT activist Marielle Franco last year.


 
I feel like this has often been glossed over. The defense arguments raised by Trump and his lackeys paints the Ukrainians as fools with no deductive reasoning ability. They knew the aid was being delayed and repeatedly and unsuccessfully sought answers from US officials on why there was a hold on the aid. They also knew that Giuliani had been pressuring them for months to investigate Burisma/Biden, the 2016 election and that satisfying Rudy was the key to gaining favor with Trump. Rudy said that everything he did was part of his legal representation of Trump.
Zelensky and his aides are not stupid.

In September during a phonecall, Zelensky committed to a issuing a public statement on CNN and the hold on the aid was released just 3 days later. Zelensky then decided not to give the public statement about the investigations after all.
Worth noting that the WH would also have been aware of the whistleblower complaint at the time they finally lifted the hold on the aid.
 
Last edited:
In a brief analysis yesterday, I noted that a key element of Roger Stone's defense argument against his false statement charges also hypothetically implicated him in lying under oath.
What is wrong with these morons? His own attorneys are now trying to argue that Stone did not have an intermediary. In that hypothetical, that means he lied to Congress about the intermediary.
Stone's witness tampering charge is about pressuring Credico to lie under oath about him being Stone's intermediary rather than Jerome Corsi. Stone then threatened to kill Credico's dog if he didn't perjure himself to match with Stone's own testimony.
Flynn's attorneys are trying to pull a similar stunt by arguing that Flynn was actually innocent, which would mean he lied under oath twice by reaffirming every part of his guilty plea, including infront of the judge set to sentence him.

Obviously Stone is counting on a pardon but it doesn't make this strategy any less baffling.


On day 2 of the Stone trial, the prosecutors have now seized on Stone digging himself deeper. Stone testified that he only communicated with his intermediary over the phone. He also falsely testified that Randy Credico was his intermediary and threatened to kill Credico's dog if he didn't perjure himself by matching his testimony to Stone's false testimony.
The prosecution lays out hundreds of communications between Stone and Credico, including emails. They have now trapped Stone, forcing him to concede to at least one lie no matter how he tries to spin his way out of this particular argument.

If Stone argues Credico was not his intermediary, he establishes that he lied under oath to House Intel about Credico being his intermediary. It would also bolster the witness tampering charge, as Stone tried to get Credico to match his false testimony that Credico was Stone's intermediary.
If Stone argues Credico was indeed his intermediary, he establishes that he lied under oath about only communicating with his intermediary over the phone.


 
Last edited:
After watching our PRESIDENT ELECT go off and drag another Bum in Bevins to a win in Kentucky, I think it is time for us to encourage him to adopt a Load Management Plan to preserve his body for the 2020 election. I would hope that he spends more time at the golf course than carrying his teammates to new wins.
 


Someone put the paws on Glen Greenwald in Brazil. :lol: :lol:

US media needs to play this clip the next time he comes on to cape for Russia

aepps20 aepps20 we need your fight analysis


Greatness is not something you're born with, greatness is something that is earned in the early mornings and late nights in the gym working with your trainer. The fighter in the suit jacket has clearly spent hours in the gym perfecting his craft. I could spend hours breaking down the chopping left he used but the key punch was the right hand that the fighter in the green blocked. The fighter in the suit used that punch to get the fighter in green in range to unload the left. His use of verbal quickness to open up the fighter in green for the devastating left was BEAUTIFUL. Props to Telemundo for bringing us this fight. Some of the best TV is on Telemundo. If they start to bring us fights, I will cut the cord for sure.
 


Someone put the paws on Glen Greenwald in Brazil. :lol: :lol:

US media needs to play this clip the next time he comes on to cape for Russia

aepps20 aepps20 we need your fight analysis

How is this funny, exactly? Do you know the context of this exchange? Do you know the broader context of the enmity between Greenwald and Nunes in relation to Brazilian politics?

I'm not trying to start an argument here, but I'm baffled by your response.

EDIT: I don't agree with Greenwald's analysis and conclusions regarding the Mueller Report and the broader issue of Russian interference, which is clearly what you were getting at. But this scenario has nothing to do with that, and Greenwald has worked tirelessly and literally put his life on the line to expose corruption at the highest levels of Brazilian society, particularly with respect to the forces that conspired to subvert democracy to frame and oust Lula and Rousseff, undermine the Workers' Party and install the current reactionary regime of Bolsoñaro. That is the basis for his animosity toward Nunes, a conservative lackey and someone who has also taken personal swipes at Greenwald's family.
 
Last edited:
How is this funny, exactly? Do you know the context of this exchange? Do you know the broader context of the enmity between Greenwald and Nunes in relation to Brazilian politics?

I'm not trying to start an argument here, but I'm baffled by your response.

EDIT: I don't agree with Greenwald's analysis and conclusions regarding the Mueller Report and the broader issue of Russian interference, which is clearly what you were getting at. But this scenario has nothing to do with that, and Greenwald has worked tirelessly and literally put his life on the line to expose corruption at the highest levels of Brazilian society, particularly with respect to the forces that conspired to subvert democracy to frame and oust Lula and Rousseff, undermine the Workers' Party and install the current reactionary regime of Bolsoñaro. That is the basis for his animosity toward Nunes, a conservative lackey and someone who has also taken personal swipes at Greenwald's family.
Jesus ****ing Christ dude I am just laughing at two old washed white dudes having scrap. I know the their backgrounds.

It was more to set up aepps20 aepps20 for another joke
 
It’s like....we haven’t learnt a got damn thing. The View...giving Don Jr a platform to normalize this BS and spread disinformation is stupid on stupid. :smh:

But then their complaints about “censorship“ of the right would have credence (maybe not to logical people but this is how it will be spun)

damb if you do, damb if you don’t
 
Back
Top Bottom