Trump profited from Syrian missile strike.

Taft2016 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I don't think you get it.

You can wait until you have conclusive proof .. that you won't believe anyway no matter how conclusive it may be.

Those who oppose Trump don't have to wait for anything. We can draw our own conclusions based on what WE see. Isn't that exactly what republicans did throughout Obama's entire terms in office?

Of course it is.

Your argument that he shouldn't present facts and evidence unless you like it is truly what's feeble and pointless.
 
blackascoal said:
I don't think you get it.

You can wait until you have conclusive proof .. that you won't believe anyway no matter how conclusive it may be.

Those who oppose Trump don't have to wait for anything. We can draw our own conclusions based on what WE see. Isn't that exactly what republicans did throughout Obama's entire terms in office?

Of course it is.

Your argument that he shouldn't present facts and evidence unless you like it is truly what's feeble and pointless.
Click to expand...

It depends if you want to have an intellectually honest conversation or not.
 
blackascoal said:
I don't think you get it.

You can wait until you have conclusive proof .. that you won't believe anyway no matter how conclusive it may be.

Those who oppose Trump don't have to wait for anything. We can draw our own conclusions based on what WE see. Isn't that exactly what republicans did throughout Obama's entire terms in office?

Of course it is.

Your argument that he shouldn't present facts and evidence unless you like it is truly what's feeble and pointless.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you're proud of sticking to a totally fact free argument.
 
cawacko said:
It depends if you want to have an intellectually honest conversation or not.
Click to expand...

You and I can have an intellectually intelligent conversation right now. Neither you or I can say conclusively if this is true or not.

What we can do is present what we believe to be true or leading.

How much more intellectually honest does it get?
 
Taft2016 said:
I'm glad you're proud of sticking to a totally fact free argument.
Click to expand...

What facts do you have that it isn't true .. and I noticed that you skipped right over the FACT that republicans didn't wait for proof.

I don't know if it's true that he based his decision of his stock portfolio .. but I do know that his supporters didn't think revealing his taxes was important.

It's not like you're speaking from some ivory tower on issues like this.
 
war-is-rackey-678x381.jpg


"WAR is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars, and the losses in lives."
 
I don't believe it was for profit, that was just a bonus if he does own stock.

There could be many reasons for this, but Donald is pretty simple in motivation, he needed a bump in the polls, he wanted to be perceived as a good guy, tough guy. It's the chest thump. He is the fearless leader. I haven't seen if it's given him a bump, it sure made Sen. Graham happy. He's beating he's war drum, again.

Big ship moving into waters off Korea, these are some exciting times for the neocons, it's like 2003 all over, again.
 
The question isn't whether he profited from the attack. If owns the stock, of course he did.

The only question is if he looked at his portfolio before deciding to do it .. and that's a question that I don't really think matters.

He profited from the attack is the real story.
 
blackascoal said:
I don't think you get it.

You can wait until you have conclusive proof .. that you won't believe anyway no matter how conclusive it may be.

Those who oppose Trump don't have to wait for anything. We can draw our own conclusions based on what WE WANT TO see. Isn't that exactly what republicans did throughout Obama's entire terms in office?

Of course it is.

Your argument that he shouldn't present facts and evidence unless you like it is truly what's feeble and pointless.
Click to expand...

ftfy
 
blackascoal said:
The question isn't whether he profited from the attack. If owns the stock, of course he did.

The only question is if he looked at his portfolio before deciding to do it .. and that's a question that I don't really think matters.

He profited from the attack is the real story.
Click to expand...

YEAH; before doing anything, he needs to look and see if he owns any stock that pertains to it.

Such as:
"From now on; the military is not allowed to use weapons that have any connection to _________, ________,_________, or _________ and they can only use munitions that have no connection to my portfolio.
 
Is there an actual non left wing site that has shown he owns stock in Raytheon?
 
Last edited:
cawacko said:
Is that an actual non left wing site that has shown he owns stock in Raytheon?
Click to expand...

Does he own stock or is it a holding of a mutual fund?

Does he have 1000 shares, meaning the temporary bump earned him a whopping $2000 on paper, because nothing is a profit until it is sold.

Liberals are really mining new depths of mindless desperation, with DumbAsDuckShit pointing them over the cliff.
 
Taft2016 said:
Does he own stock or is it a holding of a mutual fund?

Does he have 1000 shares, meaning the temporary bump earned him a whopping $2000 on paper, because nothing is a profit until it is sold.

Liberals are really mining new depths of mindless desperation, with DumbAsDuckShit pointing them over the cliff.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It completely misses the big picture of his value comes from real estate not potentially a few shares of Raytheon thus it makes no sense.
 
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...

Please be accurate when referring to my posts. I did not say he *started a war* so his stock will increase. My exact words were "Of course he wants war. Think of how much wealthier he and his cronies will become if there's war."

Yes that was my usual anti-trump snark. But there is a grain of truth in the fact that it's all about money to trump, no matter how much we're talking about. trump's decision to strike in Syria was not a well-thought-out strategic decision. And I doubt that he was only thinking about the children. I couldn't find a trump tweet or comment about the death of Alan Kurdi that caused international horror a few years ago, probably because it's people like him and his family that are trying to flee Syria and trump doesn't want them here.

Do you seriously think trump gives a rat's ass about any kids? Even in his own family he seems to ignore Barron and Tiffany in favor of the first three.
 
AWESOME! EPIC FAIL When CNN’s Interview Of Syrian Victim Ends Up Bashing The Wrong Politician

A set up by CNN to try and push the anti-Trump narrative experienced a major detour today when a survivor of a gas attack in 2013 didn’t follow the line of propaganda that CNN was pushing. CNN pundit Brooke Baldwin had interviewed this victim of the 2013 attack just 3 days ago. This survivor spoke of the attacks on innocents setting up the liberal humanitarian perspective.

Fast forward to today when we have the aftermath of last night’s airstrike, Ms. Baldwin brought Kassem Eid back to frame a narrative about President Trump launching an airstrike in Syria, but being unwilling to accept Syrian refugees. They wanted to make Trump out to be a hypocrite.

To set up the attack on Trump, CNN producers *showed Hillary Clinton saying, “we cannot speak of protecting Syria’s babies, and in the next breath close America’s doors to them“.

What happened next shocked Baldwin and she couldn’t shut this guy down fast enough…Epic!

Kassem Eid, who survived a 2013 chemical gas attack in Syria, expresses his gratitude to President Trump for his missile strike of a Syrian airbase.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top