maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee

No, you were insulting Trump and we both know it. You DO remember that Rachael Maddow "somehow" got hold of one of trumps tax returns, and on air, in front of millions ( at least at that time) discovered that Trump paid $15,000,000 for wh**ever year it was. FIFTEEN MILLION DOLLARS!!!

OK man, you win. I give up. Trump actually levied a tax on French wines so that he could make more money in his own winery, and was just too stupid to see that if he had put taxes on ALL imported wines, he could have made the maximum increase in profits.

acknowledgeurma

maximus wrote, "OK man, you win. I give up. Trump actually levied a tax on French wines so that he could make more money in his own winery..."

Well this is just silly. Do you even read what I write? I wrote, "I think there's little evidence for these narratives..." I think it's a little silly to present a narrative where President Trump increases tariffs on French wines to increase his wine selling profits. The other narratives I presented are even sillier. I thought you would have realized that. That you seem not to have, is further confirmation of Poe's Law.

You, maximus, say, "There is no self interest, it's only Trump putting America first."

I think we have no idea why Trump does anything, just as we have no idea why any other six-year-old boy does anything. We can speculate. He does seem to get a big kick out of winning. But not just winning, he seems to feel c***ted in a deal if his opposite feels satisfied, as if the idea of win-win is incomprehensible. So when he takes on the role of America's avatar, America only wins if other countries feel defeat. If another country is satisfied with a trade deal then America must have been c***ted - America must have lost.

You keep insisting that I "[was] insulting Trump and we both know it". I don't know it. Could you elaborate? Have I insulted "the chosen one" when I say he is unpredictable, that he seems to like winning?

P.S.: As for taxes, I thought this was interesting:
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/03/trumps-tax-return-suggests-hes-most-incompetent-billionaire-nation/

maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee

You insulted him in this very post;
Duh...it's an insult to say that the president is a mental 6 year old and you clearly placed him in that category with the words "any other 6 year old boy".

Barracuda2020 posted this statement;

He CLEARLY said that Trump levied a tax on imported wine to boost his profits at his own winery. He also said it was t***sparent or, in other words, easily seen. Number one, it was only French wine, (which Barracuda2020 DIDN'T say), and number two, the tax, tariff, wh**ever was in response to the French taxing big tech, like Amazon and Facebook. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with Trump making more money at his winery.
That's all I was saying about what Barracuda2020 said and didn't want to make a career out of it.

Oh yeah...I never heard you say that Trump DIDN'T levy that "tax" on imported wines to make more money in his own winery.

acknowledgeurma

How can it be an insult to agree (or at least repeat) Trump's own self assessment? See:
https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/04/opinions/president-trump-six-year-old-with-nuclear-weapons-dantonio/index.html
Where Trump is quoted, "When I look at myself in the first grade and I look at myself now, I’m basically the same. The temperament is not that different."

This was before Trump became President Trump. Perhaps he has made a reassessment since the e******n.

Again, did you even read what I wrote?
"'I think there's little evidence for these narratives...' I think it's a little silly to present a narrative where President Trump increases tariffs on French wines to increase his wine selling profits."

I didn't start down this career path because I wanted to argue about why President Trump would want to impose a tax on French wine. As I said, "I have no idea why Trump does anything..." I only wanted to point out that President Trump could impose a tax (tariff), since Congress had ceded that authority in certain circumstances. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_tariffs#Legality

You are the one who keeps badgering me to give what I think is the reason President Trump would want to impose a tax on French wine.

Let me repeat, I have no idea why "the chosen one" does anything.

maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee

Trump levied a tax on French wines in response to the French levying a 3% tax on American big tech companies. That is the t***h. No other facts are needed to know it. That Trump levied the tariff on French wine to boost profit for his own winery is false. Knowing the t***h makes it so.

I've reread you reply's.

To answer your questions:
Do you actually believe that Trump levied a tariff against another country to make a little more money from his winery?
I have no idea why Trump does anything and I'm not certain that he does.

Or that he even could?
Well...wouldn't it be a national security issue if his wine didn't sell? INSULT


In order to know if the original statement presents a false narrative, we would need more information. For example, we would need to know if Trump wine competes with French wine or if instead it competes with Boone's Farm. INSULT

Here's another narrative: President Trump, realizing his buddy Bezos is hurting from the French tax on Amazon, decides to punish the French by taxing their wine, despite the fact it will cost him more when his buddies at his Mar-a-Lago Club order French wine. America (Amazon) First! INSULT

And another narrative: President Trump (economic genius he is) realizes the increased profit he can make when his buddies at his Mar-a-Lago Club (who are drowning in extra cash due to the tax cuts he and the Republicans passed) pay a hefty percentage markup on the higher cost of the fine French wine he sells. INSULT

Yet another narrative: President Trump, with the extra profits from the fine French wine he sells, can now hire more undocumented workers, who with their stolen Social Security Numbers, will add (and not withdraw) to the Social Security Trust Fund extending its life. America First! INSULT

Of course all these narratives could have been avoided had President Trump fully divested his business interests, or at the very least made the workings of his business fully t***sparent by releasing tax returns, public audits, etc.

Another narrative: President Trump did not fully divested his business interests because his debts overwhelm his assets. Were he to divest, the emperor would be revealed. Emperor? INSULT


Of course, you are comparing this calumny to the statement about President Trump and the wine tariffs that you claim is false. So are you saying that the things you wrote about the Obamas are also false? If so, why did you repeat them? I never said the rumors were true OR false. I only repeated what I have read.



The comment about a 6 year old Trump with nuclear weapons was by a CNN liar. If YOU did any cross checking you would know NOT to use pretty much anything that CNN says. That report was before the e******n. Look at CNN's rating's nowadays. They are falling off the face of the earth because they just can't tell the t***h when it comes to trump.


You may have have been confused by all the chaos of the melee. The N**is were the ones with the tiki torches, the ones driving into demonstrators, the ones shouting "Jews will not replace us". Of course, you are referring to the free speech of those that had a permit and were steered into a****a by the barriers being set up that way by police, who were following orders of a democratic mayor...WHO refused to give the marchers a permit until they filed and won a lawsuit.


Take a hypothetical. Suppose President Trump went out on 5th Avenue (soon to be President Barack H. Obama Avenue?) and shot Jared Kushner. We wouldn't think this would properly be called rightist terror. No we would just think this was Trump being Trump crazy. Why on earth would you use that as a hypothetical?


Hmm, I'm not sure the Dayton shootings could properly be called l*****t terror. He did k**l his sister and her/his (?) friend. It sounds more like a plain-old crazy k*****g as opposed to a political crazy k*****g. Really? Why would you not be sure? He SAID he was a socialist...Elizabeth Warren is a socialist...he said he would happily v**e for her....that he wasn't going to wait on the i***ts to come to socialism.


This one I'll give you. A tariff IS a tax, or as the definition I read said, a form of a tax on imported and sometimes exported goods.