Trump got $413,000,000.00 from daddy

Micawber said:
That covers most of it. You forgot a couple, say lazy, wrathful, ignorant, incurious, predatory, gluttonous adulterer with a not quite freakishly tiny mushroom shaped genitalia.

Come to think of it, he's like jabba de hut.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about 100% lazy, unless you're talking about reading, as he isn't very well read.

But, for a 72 year old, he does seem to have a lot of energy- especially while he is on his Trump Stump or running his mouth!

Hell, most people retire at 65. And this idiot wants to rule the world now!

The thing is, he is a liar and a crook- and he's gotta' go!
 
christiefan915 said:
False.
Click to expand...

monosyllabic

adjective
(of a word or utterance) consisting of one syllable.
(of a person) using brief words to signify reluctance to engage in conversation.
"the nearer they came to Rome, the more quiet and monosyllabic Paul seemed to become"



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A picture tells a thousand words
 
bhaktajan said:

monosyllabic

adjective
(of a word or utterance) consisting of one syllable.
(of a person) using brief words to signify reluctance to engage in conversation.
"the nearer they came to Rome, the more quiet and monosyllabic Paul seemed to become"



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A picture tells a thousand words
Click to expand...

No rebuttal to your lie about Mrs. Robinson?
 
Jarod said:
There is nothing wrong with inheriting a half $1 billion dollars from your wealthy family, there is something wrong with lying about it.
Click to expand...

While I get your point, (he wasn't morally culpable for winning the genetic lottery) I don't agree. I think there is something wrong with anyone being staked that much money in life, for themselves and for everyone else.
If you fell from mars and were responsible for allocating capital, I'm pretty sure you would not randomly dump 1/2 B on one guy and have a 5 million little brown kids in shithole nations
die after a week from starvation or dysentery. But it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that is the world we live in.

Nobody should inherit that much money when even a single child on earth dies from poverty, malaria, dirty water or lack of calories.
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
I'm not sure about 100% lazy, unless you're talking about reading, as he isn't very well read.

But, for a 72 year old, he does seem to have a lot of energy- especially while he is on his Trump Stump or running his mouth!

Hell, most people retire at 65. And this idiot wants to rule the world now!

The thing is, he is a liar and a crook- and he's gotta' go!
Click to expand...

Point taken, I was focused on couch potato with that term.
 
Micawber said:
While I get your point, (he wasn't morally culpable for winning the genetic lottery) I don't agree. I think there is something wrong with anyone being staked that much money in life, for themselves and for everyone else.
If you fell from mars and were responsible for allocating capital, I'm pretty sure you would not randomly dump 1/2 B on one guy and have a 5 million little brown kids in shithole nations
die after a week from starvation or dysentery. But it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that is the world we live in.

Nobody should inherit that much money when even a single child on earth dies from poverty, malaria, dirty water or lack of calories.
Click to expand...

Nothing stopping you with what you make now from helping those kids. Why wait for others.
 
Micawber said:
While I get your point, (he wasn't morally culpable for winning the genetic lottery) I don't agree. I think there is something wrong with anyone being staked that much money in life, for themselves and for everyone else.
If you fell from mars and were responsible for allocating capital, I'm pretty sure you would not randomly dump 1/2 B on one guy and have a 5 million little brown kids in shithole nations
die after a week from starvation or dysentery. But it is an INDISPUTABLE fact that is the world we live in.

Nobody should inherit that much money when even a single child on earth dies from poverty, malaria, dirty water or lack of calories.
Click to expand...

I would not either, I think it harms them, turns them into someone like TRump. But if its what floats your boat.
 
Jarod said:
I would not either, I think it harms them, turns them into someone like TRump. But if its what floats your boat.
Click to expand...

And it is also a reason why some super rich people are super rich. Many are extremely stingy. It's pretty funny to me when you go to
a meal, say, with some rich people and they tip much less than you. Weird when they lowball the little people.
 
Micawber said:
And it is also a reason why some super rich people are super rich. Many are extremely stingy. It's pretty funny to me when you go to
a meal, say, with some rich people and they tip much less than you. Weird when they lowball the little people.
Click to expand...

they do not respect the little people. they will also cheat their partners, Trump is big into prenups too. Fuck everyone but me .is Trumps motto.
 
Nordberg said:
they do not respect the little people. they will also cheat their partners, Trump is big into prenups too. Fuck everyone but me .is Trumps motto.
Click to expand...

I understand a prenup to a point. You go into a marriage with an empire with someone with nothing....

If it isn't a real marriage, the empire person and their family is at major risk. I would suggest a sliding scale or vesting
over time prenup. "You stick with me you get more." Incentivize the family!
 
PostmodernProphet said:
If I can't win an argument about the NYT article I will try to divert the thread to a different topic
Click to expand...

I suppose it's good that you came right out and admitted what you were doing. But wouldn't it be better if you just took a step back and thought about WHY you're unable to win this argument? It's not because I'm smarter than you. It's because the facts are on my side.
 
Oneuli said:
I suppose it's good that you came right out and admitted what you were doing. But wouldn't it be better if you just took a step back and thought about WHY you're unable to win this argument? It's not because I'm smarter than you. It's because the facts are on my side.
Click to expand...

I believe you my have overlooked that fact that I DID win the argument......sorry.....of course if you didn't always pick the wrong side of the argument you wouldn't always lose......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I believe you my have overlooked that fact that I DID win the argument
Click to expand...

Oh, you poor dear, do you really think that? Go back and reread. It should become clear how badly you lost, around the time you stopped even trying to think of substantive responses to the points I was making, and instead started whining about us having wandered from the first topic. If you still haven't gotten it by that point, proceed to the part where you were so distraught by your defeat that you outright fabricated a statement to wrongly attribute to me.
 
bhaktajan said:
Obama's mother-in-law doesn't get secret service protection for life?

But what about the Black Crusaders?

But what about if Mrs Robinson [not Ruby Dee] just lived in the basement apartment? ---Same difference!!!

And what about the Black Crusaders????

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/a1db50f8-e2e1-4e8f-a0ea-d1ab7c6e5685
Click to expand...

She does not get SS protection for life.

The Secret Service is authorized by law to protect:[SUP][6][/SUP]

  • The President, Vice President (or other officer next in the order of succession to the Office of President, should the Vice Presidency be vacant), President-elect and Vice President-elect
  • The immediate families of the above individuals
  • Former Presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes (except when the spouse divorces or remarries), under the Former Presidents Act. From 1997 until 2013, legislation was in place limiting Secret Service protection to former Presidents and their spouses to a period of 10 years from the date the former President leaves office. President Barack Obama signed legislation on January 10, 2013, reversing this limit and reinstating lifetime protection.[SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8][/SUP]
  • The widow or widower of a former President who dies in office or dies within a year of leaving office for a period of one year after the President's death (the Secretary of Homeland Security can extend the protection time)
  • Children of former Presidents until age 16 or 10 years after the presidency
  • Former Vice Presidents, their spouses, and their children under 16 years of age, for up to 6 months from the date the former Vice President leaves office (the Secretary of Homeland Security can extend the protection time)
  • Visiting heads of states or governments and their spouses traveling with them
  • Other distinguished foreign visitors to the United States and official representatives of the United States performing special missions abroad, as directed by the President
  • Major presidential and vice presidential candidates[SUP][9][/SUP]
  • The spouses of major presidential and vice presidential candidates (within 120 days of a general presidential election)
  • Other individuals as designated per executive order of the President
  • National Special Security Events, when designated as such by the Secretary of Homeland Security
 
Oneuli said:
Oh, you poor dear, do you really think that? Go back and reread. It should become clear how badly you lost, around the time you stopped even trying to think of substantive responses to the points I was making, and instead started whining about us having wandered from the first topic. If you still haven't gotten it by that point, proceed to the part where you were so distraught by your defeat that you outright fabricated a statement to wrongly attribute to me.
Click to expand...

you haven't made any points yet.....but I am a reasonable man......I will give you another chance......state the illegal activity the NYT has discovered the Trump trusts have engaged in.....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top