I think there’s a good chance if Trump wins he never pays him back but I also think he knows that and is banking on other favors.Can't wait for Trump to screw him over.
I think there’s a good chance if Trump wins he never pays him back but I also think he knows that and is banking on other favors.Can't wait for Trump to screw him over.
They already attacked him for making a loan 1/1,000th the size and getting paid back.Now imagine the faux outrage if Biden had to get a loan from someone. Hell, they’ll accuse him of wrong doing if someone paid for his ice cream.
But we’re talking the other way around. It is far worse when they need the money vs them giving it and getting paid back with unknown funds.They already attacked him for making a loan 1/1,000th the size and getting paid back.
Exactly right.Oh it's totally fair to conclude that Trump went under more significant scrutiny as a result of his political career resulting in discovery and civil litigation for fraudulent practices that have been pervasive through his business career.
It's totally wrong to conclude that this means his current legal woes are a politically biased witch-hunt. If you want to engage in some sort of analysis of why his actions weren't discovered and litigated sooner, go ahead.
Billionaire's insurance company to the rescue.HOW did he manage to secure the $175 million for the bond? I swear this fuckers luck is unlike any I've ever seen. Now I don't think for a second anything bad would have actually happened to him if he hadn't came up with the $$$. But fuck the judge who lowered it from $455 to 175 million. I fully expected him to not be able to come up with the 175, and I was wrong. But I know damn well he would have never been able to do 455.
And I read he posted some idiotic shit on Truth Social complaining about $175 million being unfair. Yes that's a shit load of money, but it was $455. BOO FUCKING HOO.
Oh it's totally fair to conclude that Trump went under more significant scrutiny as a result of his political career resulting in discovery and civil litigation for fraudulent practices that have been pervasive through his business career.
It's totally wrong to conclude that this means his current legal woes are a politically biased witch-hunt. If you want to engage in some sort of analysis of why his actions weren't discovered and litigated sooner, go ahead.
In a rational world, owing someone that much money would preclude him becoming president. Alas.HOW did he manage to secure the $175 million for the bond? I swear this fuckers luck is unlike any I've ever seen. Now I don't think for a second anything bad would have actually happened to him if he hadn't came up with the $$$. But fuck the judge who lowered it from $455 to 175 million. I fully expected him to not be able to come up with the 175, and I was wrong. But I know damn well he would have never been able to do 455.
And I read he posted some idiotic shit on Truth Social complaining about $175 million being unfair. Yes that's a shit load of money, but it was $455. BOO FUCKING HOO.
What would be the debt limit in your rational world? Would it be a hard number or a percentage of assets? Would it also include credit score? Should we also look at where income originates? Maybe an in depth audit of the persons complete financial history would be the way to go?In a rational world, owing someone that much money would preclude him becoming president. Alas.
All assets above say $5m should have to be placed in a blind trust for the duration of one’s service in office. This would apply to judges, reps, senators, positions subject to senate approval, and the President and vice president.What would be the debt limit in your rational world? Would it be a hard number or a percentage of assets? Would it also include credit score? Should we also look at where income originates? Maybe an in depth audit of the persons complete financial history would be the way to go?
I'm not against the idea, but I wonder how it would work.
How about we cap it at the average lifetime income of a US citizen?What would be the debt limit in your rational world? Would it be a hard number or a percentage of assets? Would it also include credit score? Should we also look at where income originates? Maybe an in depth audit of the persons complete financial history would be the way to go?
I'm not against the idea, but I wonder how it would work.
So if a candidate had two billion in assets, but owed 1.7 million on their new yacht, they would be ineligible? That seems a little out of balance to me.How about we cap it at the average lifetime income of a US citizen?
For the record, that's about $1.7M today.
In that scenario they would just pay off the pittance of 1.7 million and it wouldn't be an issue...So if a candidate had two billion in assets, but owed 1.7 million on their new yacht, they would be ineligible? That seems a little out of balance to me.
That's what they do if you want a clearance. The president needs to have a clearance. Trump would never be able to get a clearance.What would be the debt limit in your rational world? Would it be a hard number or a percentage of assets? Would it also include credit score? Should we also look at where income originates? Maybe an in depth audit of the persons complete financial history would be the way to go?
I'm not against the idea, but I wonder how it would work.
That's what they do if you want a clearance. The president needs to have a clearance. Trump would never be able to get a clearance.
Yes, as stated if they have billions, they shouldn't owe anyone anything prior to running for office.So if a candidate had two billion in assets, but owed 1.7 million on their new yacht, they would be ineligible? That seems a little out of balance to me.
Beat me to it.That's what they do if you want a clearance. The president needs to have a clearance. Trump would never be able to get a clearance.
I don't think there should be a legal prohibition from holding office but I think a rational voter would see someone that deeply in debt and decide that someone that compromised shouldn't hold high office.What would be the debt limit in your rational world? Would it be a hard number or a percentage of assets? Would it also include credit score? Should we also look at where income originates? Maybe an in depth audit of the persons complete financial history would be the way to go?
I'm not against the idea, but I wonder how it would work.
Sure are, haha. At some point with a democracy it comes down to the voters though.Lol there’s 70 million irrational voters though