SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Donald Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (13951)9/27/2016 2:42:07 PM
From: Old Boothby2 Recommendations

Recommended By
GROUND ZERO™
Vendit™

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 73734
 
I entirely agree with you, GZ.

I've always thought that when Hillary and other leftists start attacking Trump for saying "mean and degrading things about women", Trump should respond very cleanly and simply. Imagine these words in Trump's style, voice, and delivery:

"The stories that you are referring to were all cases of me responding to initial attacks on me. Okay? Initial attacks on me. Every episode. I was responding to initial and unprovoked attacks on me. I have a lovely wife, a lovely daughter, wonderful ladies in my employ, and wonderful ladies whom I do business with. I have the utmost respect, appreciation, and admiration for women in all walks of life.

Now, if you want to talk about saying mean and degrading things, what about the published reports from the secret service about you calling children at an Easter egg hunt "bleeping retards"? It was so offensive and degrading, and I won't use the actual insulting and hurtful word that you reportedly used, okay?

Oh, and by the way, I don't think that the best way to solve urban crime problems is by calling African-Americans superpredators, okay? That was so hurtful, and you should not have demanded that they be brought to heel like dogs. That's not the way to solve our nation's crime problems, Secretary Clinton. It's was so hurtful, degrading, and certainly not helpful.

And I hate to bring this up, but since you've brought up character issues, the secret audio recording of you laughing about freeing the rapist of a 12-year old girl is out there, online, and it's been studied. It's all over the Internet, and people are not happy about the way that you laughed about ruining a 12-year old girl who was raped. They're not happy about it at all. It was disgusting and disgraceful, but those are the kinds of abuses that you and Bill are used to engaging in. It's your record."

I hope he says all of that and more! I can think of a million other things, as I'm sure that most people can. Respond with clear, concise, hard hitters, and let her cope with it. To hell with her! LOL!

He should ask her to tell America what she was doing while Ambassador Stevens and his team begged for help in Libya. HIT HER HARD ON THESE ISSUES!! Regardless of what is asked, control the conversation and tempo! There are millions of examples!



To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (13951)9/27/2016 2:43:10 PM
From: robert b furman3 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
GROUND ZERO™
Oblivious

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 73734
 
If Donald has his estate planned properly, he will have given his children non voting rights of his estate - most of the income is shared via non voting rights stock, and yet he'll have complete control of all the voting stock and investment decisions.

After one has enough passive investment income to comfortably live - the rest is better shared to your children who can benefit from the lower progressive tax rates.

Of course dividends is the best rate but I've heard Donald is not all that involved in equities.

It would in fact not give you much information about his wealth and or income as it should be parceled out to help his heirs.

Lifer politicians who have only had a government job / salary are basically clueless about how passive income works - other than of course they like to increase the associated tax rate.

Bob