PRESIDENT EPSTEIN HAS ADMITTED TO THE COURTS HE DOESN’T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY THE JUDGMENTS AND MUST SELL PROPERTIES FIRST. HE HAS SAID HE CAN ONLY PAY $100 MILLION.

This means 1) no appeals 2) SURPRISE! Trump lied about his assets and 3) the enforcement of the judgements can be enforced now because he just conceded he cannot pay the judgement or put up a bond, so seizure can begin now unless he gets an emergency stay….which was just DENIED…as was his offer to put up just $100 million.

I encourage his creditors to do whatever the hell they want with his money and since he won’t pay the state the state won’t come to help. 😂

He is barred from getting a loan against any NY holdings.
Hide and wait, wanna bet his stake in his properties isn’t as great as he’s claimed, maybe some with no ownership percentage at all just his name on the door (Trump Tower for instance, which is actually owned by GE and the condo owners and except for the lobby bathrooms, kitchen, and parking lot is just managed by the Trump org.).

So much for being a billionaire or great negotiator. He negotiated a $5 million debt into an $88 million and growing debt…good job! Now he owes near $540 million in judgements + nearly $140000 a DAY in interest between just the NY verdicts, money he doesn’t have. He’s the best ever at being the worst ever. 😂

As a bonus- total failure McConnel is quitting. Another red seat up for grabs with Republicans being historically unpopular after voting to keep open borders and broken immigration systems and once again perching on the brink of closing the government because they cannot govern.
Edit- my mistake, he’s only retiring as the head of the senate, not as a senator.
PS- https://videosift.com/video/Bobo-8482-s-Son-Arrested-On-22-Criminal-Charges

Aaaaahahahaha….you fucking imbecile. Biden is much looser than uptight, stick up his ass Trump….that’s a good thing.

Fuck Loser Trump, an actual loser who never once got more votes than his opponent, and created the worst economic period in American history while dividing the nation to the brink of civil war. A real loser.

Fuck you moronic treasonous Trumptards too, too dumb to see how dumb you are. Too blinded by the orange glow to notice you’re falling off a cliff. Too infantile to know what to do about your full diapers. A real bunch of losers led by the biggest loser ever. 😂

Enjoy Roevember.

Noooo….you still don’t like Biden. You still think self serving narcissistic Trump was a leader, but a lifelong frugal public servant isn’t. Nooooo! (I know there’s no breaking through your fantasy, bob. You are a lost cause, totally divorced from reality and totally uninterested in honesty).

No bob, I mean the Union…as in the United States of America. As in the Union vs the Confederacy. Trump nearly dissolved the Union, so much that Republican platforms now include secession as their goal. Derp. Another “L” for your column. Another dunce cap for your collection.
Republicans want to erase America out of infantile spite, but have no idea what to do afterwards. Better learn Chinese or Russian, red states can’t afford to defend themselves, you are all welfare queen states with the highest murder and crime rates.

Side note: But, this means you are anti union, so 100% anti worker? Really? What favors has Biden handed unions? Most unions (all you oppose) lobby for workers, blue collar employees. You would limit lobbiests to to those lobbying for billionaires and huge corporations (including religious corporations) that actively lobby against workers rights, pay, safety, ecological responsibility, hours, etc. Think about that.

You fucking moron, it went from 3.08% (higher than Trump ever reached) in 2015 under Obama to -3.5% in 2020 (the lowest ever in history). Who the fuck told you .2%? Who told you Trump left it at 2.5%? Overall Obama’s growth rate was actually 50% higher than Trump’s, and Obama inherited a deep recession, Trump inherited a boom. They outright lied to you, and you just lapped it up without ever looking. They’re feeding you poo pie bob, not chocolate. I really wish I didn’t have to spend so much time correcting your obviously fabricated statistics, especially since you only spout them to force a correction, getting you attention, not because you believe or even understand them. So you understand, printing 50% more money while your economy is in the worst contraction ever causes inflation, and that’s what Trump did in 2020 while focusing on the election he lost in a landslide and ignoring the pandemic and economy.

Jobs?!? Obama job growth was near 8% adding 12.5 million jobs, Trump was the only president ever to lose jobs, losing 3.2 million. Another 100% break from reality, buddy. I’m telling you, you need professional help.

Yes, Trump did turn us around, from a massive recovery and booming economy to massive economic losses, job losses, absolutely insane deficits and trying to double the debt, huge money printing in 2020 (magic wand waiving) that creates massive inflation (that he now blames Biden for), undreamed of losses of life, and teetering on the brink of depression and pandemic. He made us madder. For libs that means angry, for cons that means totally bat shit crazy with no ties to reality at all.

Far from it, lots of positive, but so much negative left from the previous one we are still in the red.

They have made policies that help the American pocketbook, Trump robbed it blind to hand to billionaires (and fake billionaires).

Who told you that lie. The Democrats have done everything they legally can to force oil companies to increase production and stop price gouging, Republicans all voted against doing anything, then claim “Biden’s fault”. No fossil fuel production has been cut. You’ve been lied to, and you aren’t intellectually honest enough to investigate for yourself…you don’t want to hear the truth.

Republicans are to blame for high fuel prices, Democrats are responsible for the recent lowering. Democrats are making efforts to lower them further, Republicans are 100% opposed to any actions.

Trump benefited on fuel costs thanks to the economic collapse he caused by denying and ignoring Covid for months, dropping the demand for fuel to nothing…not a good policy overall, or do you suggest killing another million and shutting down another year to lower gas prices?


Lol. You are claiming reports say the average American spends $500 more on fuel and goods per month than under Trump? What reports? Glen Beck, AON, or Rush Limbaugh’s ghost? Only if you are a trucker using hundreds of gallons of gas a month. Even in California, fuel cost has gone up less than 1/5 of what you say.

Trump cost you SO much more than $6k per year, over $60k per taxpayer on the official debt alone…and these extra expenses (probably $100-$200 per month tops) are thanks to Trump printing 1/3 of every dollar in circulation (inflation) and fuel supply and demand being out of hand intentionally because oil companies make more money by producing less, and aren’t nationalized so the government can’t force them to stop gouging.

Such nonsense bob. Your facts are all wrong, and since you won’t investigate you are just going to continue to believe the lies you were fed. The people you listen to are making money off your beliefs, bob, and they see you as a huge sucker they can convince of anything and get your money or support for their America destroying “get me richer quick” schemes.

🤦‍♂️

Summary, since I don’t think you can read that much.
Union = United States Union, not unions
Gdp- Obama 1.59% rising consistently during his presidency Trump 1% falling precipitously to the worst ever in history. Also never beat Obama’s high.
Jobs- Obama added 12.5 million, Trump lost 3.2 million
Debt- Obama added $9 trillion, ending a recession and creating a boom over 8 years. Trump added $8 trillion on the books (and trillions more off the books) in 4 years ending a boom and creating a recession
Deficit- 2020 was the biggest budget deficit ever by >200% at $3.13 trillion and added well over $4.2 trillion to the debt that year, way more than 2021 at a still horrific $2.7 budget deficit but ending adding only $1.5 to the debt.

https://www.thebalance.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306

Oil/gas price - all cost cutting measures opposed by Cons.

No, but you must be.
Baby murder gets the death penalty in Texas. This law calls for civil penalties, not even a parking ticket. It's an infraction of a regulation other citizens can profit from enforcing, not murder in any way shape or form, by Texas law.

You gave me the definition!!! ROTFLMFAHS!!!!
" Definition
Murder: the unlawful premeditated killing of one HUMAN BEING by another"
But you intentionally ignore the fact that the unborn aren't yet people. You can't murder non people. I've pointed this out repeatedly. It seems you must have the illiteracy problem along with your reality problem.

It's true, I WOULD and HAVE defended infanticide, especially historically, but I absolutely have not mentioned it before now in this thread. Supporting abortion is not defending murder by any accepted definition of those words, you have to skew the definitions of human beings and the definition of murder before your position makes sense. Duh. I expect your verbal SAT score was awful, you have a tenuous grasp of English.

According to the bible, yep, not people. Sorry. Try reading it and interpreting what's actually there instead of having someone do it for you.

So, you are advocating Baptist Sharia law.

America has legalized abortions in every state by law because the majority wants it. Don't like it, fuck right off. As easy as that, but your ilk didn't fuck off, you prefer end runs around the constitution and the destruction of codified rights and using legal trickery and convolutions to enact laws that are knowingly unconstitutional but will effectively end abortions before the legal process can invalidate them by bankrupting providers. Anything BUT fucking right off. Take your own advice first, maybe.

Again, the majority in Texas don't want this, didn't vote for it, and absolutely don't want the consequences....which is an exodus of multi national corporations who won't support this nonsense with their wallets.

The majority of Americans are Christians, and a large majority want abortion to be legal and easy to access. Your logic is fatally flawed, being Christian doesn't mean you're anti abortion any more than it means you're anti murder, in fact it means you're more likely to support and defend murder, the bible prescribes it for almost any infraction from actual murder to mowing your lawn on Sunday. The bible says nearly nothing about abortion, what little it does say indicates it's not a crime. Holy fuck, learn your own religion before trying to impose it on others!

Texas was already teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, no doubt the backlash for this move will push them hard over the edge. I already cancelled my trip there, and won't be buying any Texas made products. I'm not alone.
Enjoy!

Thanks, hadn't heard of her before this video.

After seeing that background video, I'm way more impressed by what she's accomplished. Unlike most other youtubers or social-media-influencers, she deserves to get rich for using her game-dev knowledge/skills in a creative new way.

Ironic that she's on the brink of perma-ban on Twitch. If they (or their Amazon overlords) were smart, they would fully embrace her style before she has to move to onlyfans or some such site.

Because Libya and Syria are the same situation as North Korea, and put us on the brink of nuclear war. Fantastic logic there. While we're on it, why not bring up Iraq and Afghanistan? Clearly Bush also wanted to nuke NK.

Her 'brains' would have left her listening to the hawks as she always does and taking us ever closer to the brink of nuclear war.

Third world living issues in a first world.
And so many more hinging on the brink, just trying to keep it together.

@transmorpher
so when i point out the historical implications,i am somehow automatically disregarding the inherent problems within islam itself?

and your counter is to not only NOT counter,but refuse to acknowledge the historical ramifications,because that is some political,agenda driven-drivel.

that the ONLY acceptable argument is to focus on the religion itself,and ignore all other considerations,because,again..just tools to be used and abused by the left to fuel the far right.

am i getting this right so far?

that to include history is actually the path that stops that path to move forward?

and here i was still hanging on to that tired old adage "those who refuse to recognize history,are doomed to repeat it".

i am glad that you found those authors so respectful and admired their analysis and dedication to research,but you didn't even bother to use one of THEIR arguments.you simply made claims and then told us you read some books.

dude..now i am just kinda...sad for you.

i am sorry that you are oblivious to your own myopia,and that you are coming across as condescending.yet really haven't posted anything of value that you have to contribute.

you are just pointing the finger and accusing people of their arguments being dishonest,when it appears to me that everyone here has taken the time to try to talk to you,and your replies have been fairly static.

hitchens tried to make the case,and failed in my opinion(i am not the only one),but a case i suspect you are referencing.that even if we took the history of neoliberalism,colonialism and empire building OFF the table.islam would STILL be a gaggle of extremist radicals seeking a one world caliphate.

which is why i referenced dearborn michigan.
it is why i mentioned kabul afghanistan.

we are talking about the radicalization of muslims.
why are they growing?
where do they come from?
why do they seem to be getting more and more extreme?

which many here have attempted to answer,including myself.

but YOU are addressing and entirely different question:
'what is wrong with islam as a religion"

well,a LOT in fact and i already mentioned islams dire need for a reformation,but it goes further than that.you see the epistemology of both judiaism and christianity have been thoroughly argued over and over....and over..that what you find today is a pretty succinct refinement of their respective theologies.

agree/disagree..maybe you are atheist or agnostic,that is not the point.the point is that the so-called "finished' product has pretty clear philosophies,that adherents can easily follow.

for judaism this is in large part to the talmud,which is a living document,where even to this day rabbis debate and argue the finer details.not to be confused with holy scripture the torah.

christianity was forced to acknowledge its failings and flaws,because the theology was weak,and was becoming more and more an amalgamation of other religious beliefs,but most of all,and i think most importantly,the in-fighting with the vatican and the church of england had exposed this weakness,and christianity was on the brink of collapse due to its own hubris and arrogance.

they had no central authority.no leadership that the people could come to in order to clarify scripture.

so thanks to the bravery of martin luther,who risked being labeled a heretic,challenged the political power,which in those days was religious,and so began the process of reformation.

and also ended the dark ages,and western civilization stepped into the "age of enlightenment".

islam has had no such reformation,though is in desperate need of one.they had no council of nicea to decide what was holy canon and what was not,which is why you have more gospels of jesus in the quran than you do in the actual bible.

the king james bible has over 38,000 mis-translations in the old testament alone,whereas the quran has....well...we don't know,because nobody challenges the veracity of the quran.

am i winning you over to my side yet?
still think i am leftist "stooge' and "useful idiot"?

look man,
words are inert.
they are simply symbols.
they are meaningless until we lay eyes on them and GIVE them meaning.

so if you are a violent,war-loving person-------your religion will be violent,and warmongering.

if you are a peaceful and loving person----then your religion will be peaceful and loving.

the problem is NOT religion itself,and i know my atheists really don't want to hear that,but it's true.religion is going nowhere.

the problem is fundamentalist thinking.
the problem is viewing holy scripture as the unerring word of god.
which is why you see creationists attempt,in vain,to convince the rest of us that the earth is only 6,000 yrs old,and their only proof or evidence is a book.

so we all point and laugh.....how silly..6,000yrs old.crazy talk.

but WHY is the creationist so adamant in his attempts to defend his holy text?
because to accept the reality that the earth is not 6,000 yrs old but 14 billion yrs old,is to go against the word of god,and god is unerring,and if the bible is the word of god....and god is unerring.........

now lets go back to dearborn michigan.
if hitchens and harris are RIGHT,then that relatively stable community of muslims are really just extremists waiting for the angels to blow their horn and announce the time for JIHAD!!!

and,to be fair,that is a possibility,but a small one.

why?
because of something the majority of christians experience here in the states,canada,europe,australia...they experience pushback.

does this mean that america does not have radical christians in our midst?

oh lawdy do we ever.

ok ok..i am doing it again.
me and my pedantic self.

suffice to say:
islam IS a problem,even taken as a singular dynamic,that religion has serious issues.
but they are not the ONLY problem,which is what many of here have been trying to talk about.

ALL religions have a problem,and that problem is fundamentalism.which for christianity is a fairly new phenom (less than 100 yrs old) whereas islam has suffered from this mental malady pretty much since its inception.

ok..thats it..im done.pooped,whipped and in need of sleep.

hope i clarified some things with ya mate,but i swear to god if you respond with a reiteration of all your comments.i am going to hunt you down,and BEAT you with a bible,and not that wimpy king james either!
the hefty scofield study bible!

Whatever Russia has or hasn't done it pales in comparison to what the democratic leadership did. They got in to bed with the big corporations at the expense of the everyday American people they are supposed to represent. Bernie could have pulled them back from the brink but they didn't want to hear it. It had to be their woman Hilary, and so they went and lost against Donald freaking Trump.

This guy is right, the whole hacking thing is a convenient distraction so the Democratic leadership doesn't have to face up to what they have done.

One recurring thing I've often noticed with US cops is that they are really really bad at deescalating standard situations. I've been multiple times to the US and every time an encounter with a cop basically ended at him either shouting at me (I approached them to ask for the way to my hotel - slightly tipsy), telling me to step out of a vehicle with his hand on a holster (traffic stop) or the cops encircling me with an extreme force multitude and warning me to "watch out". (when I walked on foot to a gas station).

Not once have I made a positive experience with US cops when visiting the states. I have never been arrested or done any illegal activity when visiting, but still I felt as if the cops do not know how to assess a situation and always approach it from a worst case scenario. Perhaps out of a fearful state of mind, I do not know - but in any case - escalating a standard situation to the brink is what they seem to be really good at.

In all your over defense of this overpriced Swiss Army plane, I have yet to see you answer 1)why we would need it considering many of our planes out perform all other nations planes already (contrary to your assertion that "every Russian fighter can out maneuver the F-16", I found that's only partly true against older, non upgraded F-16s ) and 2) how you get around the 'we won't use it much because it's far too expensive to put in danger' argument.
It can't be the best for air superiority if we are too afraid to use them because they cost too much, or if we only have a few, because they cost too much.
What I read (I'm not a pilot) is that air combat is about the kill-loss ratio, where today we expect the losses to be 0.
Again, stealth is NOT 100%, and every method used has eventually been 'cracked'. If it worked every time, I would agree with you. Since it only works until the enemy figures out how, it's not worth $1.3 trillion for ANOTHER stealth fighter, we've already got them.
This plane isn't bullet or missile proof, and will be just as visible and slow when doing real close air support...if it can. I've seen footage of warthogs landing that looked like a whiffle ball they were so full of holes. They're pretty tough.
In 10 years time, I have the feeling that international air superiority will not be our biggest concern. It's good to be prepared, but terrible to bankrupt yourself to meet a challenge that's already met, or a challenge that does not yet, and may never exist. Upgrading our current aircraft would be a MUCH better way to spend that money, and we would get WAY more out of each dollar.
The F-35 may not be in service for 10 years, and may already be obsolete by then (at least it's special systems that make it 'better' than the aircraft we have today). It really seems more like a star wars project, designed to force our 'enemies' to spend themselves into oblivion, but forcing us to the brink in the effort.
Not the "close air support" that the A-10 provides. If this is meant to replace them too, and I think it is, it will have to do what they do, low and slow.

I don't disagree that advanced systems CAN make more difference than slight performance specs, that's no reason to ignore performance, or go backwards. If it's the systems that make the plane perform better, the smart thing would be to put them on the better air frame and have a better plane all around for much cheaper. Simple.

To me, if we spent $1.3 trillion developing and tens of Billions building a fleet of these planes, it's more likely we'll eventually invent a reason to have to use them. Even if we don't, while nice we aren't killing for nothing, we will have wasted that money for nothing, and done it at a time when our debt and poorly used federal funds have the country literally falling apart... that seems more than dumb, it seems criminally insane and treasonous.

Your video, El Niño Erosion Leaves Pacifica Apartments On The Brink, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Well, Syriza is an acronym for Coalition of the Radical Left (roughly), and everything left of the Berlin Consensus is considered to be radical left. So they are going to call Syriza a radical leftist party until the political landscape itelf has been pulled back towards more leftist positions. But you're right, if they were judged by their positions, they'd be centre-left in theory, if centre-left hadn't turned into corporatism by taking up the Third Way of Schröder/Blair/Clinton.

They are, without a doubt, radically democratic though. As your Grauniad article points out, they haven't turned on their election promises yet, which is quite unheard of for a major European party. Francois Hollande in particular was a major letdown in this regard. Few people expected him to bow down to German demands so quickly. Aside from his 75% special tax for the rich, he dropped just about every single part of his program that could be considered socialism.

Grexit... that's a tough one.

Syriza cannot enforce any troika demands that relate to the programmes of the Chicago School of Economics. Friedman ain't welcome anymore. No cuts to wages or pensions, to privatisation of infrastructure, no cuts to the healthcare system, nor any other form of financial oppression of the lower class. That is non-negotiable. In fact, even increases in welfare programs and the healthcare system are pretty much non-negotiable. Even if Syriza wanted to put any of this on the table, and they sure as hell don't, they couldn't make it part of any deal without further damages to an already devasted democratic system in Greece.

So with that in mind, what's the point of all the negotiations?

Varoufakis' suggestions are very reasonable. The growth-linked bonds, for instance, are used very successfully all over the world in debt negotiations, as just about any bankrupty expert would testify. Like Krugman wrote today, Syriza is merely asking to "recognize the reality everyone supposedly already understands". His caveat about the German electorate is on point as well, we haven't had it explained to us yet – and we chose to ignore what little was explained to us.

Yet the troika insists on something Syriza cannot and will not provide, as just outlined above. Some of the officials still expect Syriza to acknowledge reality, to come to their senses and to accept a deal provided to them. Good luck with that, but don't hold your breath. Similarly, Varoufakis is aware that Berlin is almost guaranteed to play hardball all the way.

Of course, nothing is certain and they might strike a deal during their meeting in Wednesday that offers Greece a way out of misery. Or maybe the ECB decides that to stabilize to Euro, as is their sole purpose, they need to keep Greece within the EZ and away from default. That would allow them to back Greece, to provide them with financial support, at least until they present their program in June/July. Everything is possible. However, I see very little evidence in support of it.

Therefore Grexit might actually be just a question of who to blame it on. Syriza is not going to exit the EZ willy nilly, they need clear pressure from outside, so the record will unequivocally show that it wasn't them who made the call. No country can be thrown out, they have to leave of their own. Additionally, Merkel will not be the person to initiate the unravelling of the EU, as might be the consequence of a Grexit. That's leverage for Greece, the only leverage they have. But it has to be played right or else the blame will be put squarely on Greece, even more so than it already is.

-------
Edit #1: What cannot be overstated is the ability of the EZ to muddle through one crises after another, always on the brink of collapse, yet never actually collapsing. They are determined to hold this thing together, whatever the cost.
-------

Speaking of blame, Yves Smith linked a fantastic article the other day: Syriza and the French Indemnity of 1871-73.

The author makes a convincing case why the suppression of wages in Germany led to disaster in Spain, why it was not a choice on the part of Spain to engage in irresponsible borrowing and how it is a conflict between workers and the financial elite rather than nations. He also offers historical precedent, with Germany being the recipient of a massive cash influx, ending in a catastrophe similar to Spain's nowadays.

It strikes me as a very objective dissection of what happend, what's going on, and what needs to happen to get things back in shape. Then again, it agrees with many points I made on that BBC videos last week, so it's right within my bubble.