Trump profited from Syrian missile strike.

cawacko said:
So the argument you and Christifan have made is he started a war so that a stock he owns increases in value 1.5%.

This is true defeangement syndrome. I guess that is why sites like bi-partisan report, rawstory etc exist because folks will eat up anything.
Click to expand...

Putin, Trump and Assad are all in on it together. And it's probably based on more than just Raytheon stock. Likely a lot more complex and intertwined reasoning.

I wouldn't be surprised if Putin and Assad also own large chunks of stock in several US defense contractors. Simple money making proposition... Putin tells Assad to gas his own people in rebel held areas of his country. He doesn't give a fuck about them anyway. Trump comes in with a phony, limp-dick missile strike that does very little damage. Putin feigns protest in order to make the whole thing look like they aren't in on it together. Their stock prices go up and they all pocket millions.

Not only is it a highly plausible scenario, it's much more plausible than any of the hare-brained right-wing Obama or Clinton kook theories.
 
Nomad said:
Thank you for listing all those PERFECT REASONS WHY HE SHOULD NOT BE PRESIDENT.

Moron. :palm:
Click to expand...

The REAL morons are leftist dumbasses who think they can change the results of an election by refusing to accept the results and by lying, crying and stomping their little feet in protest acting like puerile, ignorant little dolts.
 
Element-22-Cat said:
Obama's holdings were mostly Treasury Bills.... and investment in the US government (albeit a shitty one, lol). So he didn't have significant investments vulnerable to conflicts.

Past presidents put their holdings into blind trusts. Trump said he was going to.
Click to expand...

So is your asinine argument suggesting that he made the decision to line his own pockets like the dimwit NOCLUE?

Anyone with a brain should know that someone who is as wealthy as Trump does not need to do anything to increase his wealth.... whereas losers like the Clintons and the Obamas left the office far more wealthier which should raise eyebrows and concerns.

This argument is as moronic as the equally facetious and repugnant claim that Hillary lost because of Russian collusion with Trump.

Dunce.
 
NoCLUE said:
No, because you are nobody. A complete and total zero in the grand scheme of things.

Nothing you do or own makes one iota of difference to anything or anyone.

So, as annoying and stupid as you are, you can feel free to remain in the discussion and continue to make your typically idiotic simpleton comments.

Your piddly little two or three shares of stock have no bearing.
Click to expand...

Translation:
cbfrm.gif
 
Nomad said:
No, because you are nobody. A complete and total zero in the grand scheme of things.

Nothing you do or own makes one iota of difference to anything or anyone.

So, as annoying and stupid as you are, you can feel free to remain in the discussion and continue to make your typically idiotic simpleton comments.

Your piddly little two or three shares of stock have no bearing.
Click to expand...

And your piddly little argument might actually be worth discussing if you could provide hard facts about how Trump owns the stock? Through a mutual fund? Or as actual shares? And if so, how much?

Sadly, that information is not presented. So your argument remains feeble and pointless.
 
Micawber said:
It's a stretch in this case, but it is important as a principle. We shouldn't have to be worrying about self dealing of our public servants. He should have divested.
Click to expand...

Only brain dead sycophants of Obama and the Party of the Jackass are concerned about these asinine claims.

Dunce.
 
Truth Detector said:
So is your asinine argument suggesting that he made the decision to line his own pockets like the dimwit NOCLUE?
Click to expand...
If you weren't an illiterate bag of rocks and you read my earlier reply in this thread you would have noticed I posted this:

"I don't think his actions in this case have anything to do with his stock holdings ..."

Anyone with a brain should know that someone who is as wealthy as Trump does not need to do anything to increase his wealth.... whereas losers like the Clintons and the Obamas left the office far more wealthier which should raise eyebrows and concerns.

This argument is as moronic as the equally facetious and repugnant claim that Hillary lost because of Russian collusion with Trump.

Dunce.
Click to expand...
Idiot piece of shit who can't read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top