Post: #301

(11-30-2016 03:07 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  Mnuchin is awful on paper, 17 years Goldman, Soros employee, turned Hollywood financier, screams subversive jew. Don't know what is up with that, Trump is Soros aware, so perhaps there is something we don't know.

Researching more into Mnuchin, I feel like it is a mixed bag of downsides and upsides, but Trump believes he can capture the upsides and avoid the downsides.

Remember how Trump always said on the campaign trail - I paraphrase: "I know them all, the best, the worst, and the ones you've never even heard about. I know horrible people, who stay up all night scheming of ways to get ahead, people you'd never want to have over your house, but do an amazing job. Wouldn't you like these kind of people making our country great again?"

Mnuchin, who made millions off distressed banks and people going homeless during the 2008 crisis, who worked for both (((Goldman))) and (((Soros))), who grew up in ultra elite Talmudic circles, strikes me as that kind of man. Not someone who is going to look out for you for nothing - not very Neighborly - but someone who is brilliant and cunning.

He's never married a Jewish woman (and divorced her) so it's doubtful his children will inherit the world he grew up in, and he worked the Trump campaign for free (or peanuts) as the head finance chairman and displayed total loyalty the entire time. Lots of Talmudic Jews were calling him up asking him why he would work for Trump, including Holocaust survivors, and he always defended the man.

He has both good and bad qualities, like most men, and it seems he's drawn to the Sec of Treasury for the status and power more than his own well-being. There is the temptation he uses the office to benefit his friends instead of the country, but Trump also sees his talents with money and knowledge of the finance industry to make this country rich again as well.

He's in a very visible role - it will be difficult for him to screw people over without Trump noticing - and Trump feels his loyalty during the campaign demonstrates sufficient trustworthiness. We're going to find out if Trump's mantra of using the best even if they are morally ambiguous pays off.

Post: #302

You guys need to calm down everytime Trump does something slightly unexpected. He's done it so many times and won that I would have hoped he be given the benefit of the doubt by now.

Worst case, he fires the guy as he's shown he's willing do to since he's fired a bunch of campaign managers when they werent performing.

Post: #303

Wilbur Ross is apparantly also a jewish financial scavenger and bankruptcy raider.

Trump is a pragmatic I get that, he has also shown he will fire and hire as needed. He must think he can control these people.

Post: #304

(12-01-2016 11:12 AM)cibo Wrote:  You guys need to calm down everytime Trump does something slightly unexpected. He's done it so many times and won that I would have hoped he be given the benefit of the doubt by now.

Worst case, he fires the guy as he's shown he's willing do to since he's fired a bunch of campaign managers when they werent performing.

I would say the same in regards to your sentiment: you guys need to calm down every time someone displays even the slightest hint of displeasure over something Trump does.

We were ecstatic over the Sessions pick. Are you expecting us to be equally positive in regards to the Mnuchin pick? Are we supposed to react to every single one of Trump's moves with equal levels of enthusiasm, regardless of what those moves are, because of "the benefit of the doubt?"

If that's the case, why discuss this shit at all? Let's just all declare ourselves 100% pleased with anything and everything that happens from today until the end of Trump's administration and call it a day.

Post: #305

Can the people who are super-upset at Mnuchin and Ross give us some names of people they would have preferred?

Treasury isn't like Housing and Urban Development, where you can just stick a guy there and he learns on the job. You would need to actually have some experience.

Who are some non-jewish, non-GS people that you would've preferred to have working there?

Post: #306

^ I agree with what SamuelBRoberts is saying. In fact, here's a post of mine from yesterday in "The Donald Trump thread" sharing much of the same sentiments:

(11-30-2016 01:37 PM)LeoneVolpe Wrote:  

(11-30-2016 10:48 AM)Enoch Wrote:  

(11-30-2016 10:42 AM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  Treasury secretary is a goldman sachs banker, who's father was also a goldman sachs banker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Mnuchin thats not draining the swamp.

I think Trump is going to deal with the low hanging fruit in Term 1, and the big structural problems in Term 2.

Term 1 Agenda

Wall
Jobs
Healthcare
Infrastructure

Term 2 Agenda

Sound(er) Money
Dysgenic welfare practices
National debt
SERIOUS reduction of govt employee headcount

I agree with Enoch. It's a matter of prioritization.

As for Mnuchin, I know on paper the guy looks like a disaster (e.g. former Goldman Sachs employee, formerly worked for Soros, Hollywood financier, etc), but remember Trump's philosophy when it comes to hiring employees:

Quote:“I have a very simple rule when it comes to management: hire the best people from your competitors, pay them more than they were earning, and give them bonuses and incentives based on their performance. That’s how you build a first-class operation.”
― Donald J. Trump, Trump: The Art of the Deal

The odds of finding someone who would be competent enough to perform as Secretary of Treasury who also has completely clean hands (not having worked for Goldman Sachs or similar institutions) is probably slim-to-none. Don't forget Bannon also worked for Goldman Sachs, and so far at least that's worked out very well.

Also, don't forget Law 2 (Never Put Too Much Trust in Friends, Learn How to Use Enemies) from Robert Greene's "The 48 Laws of Power":

Quote:"Be wary of friends they will betray you more quickly, for they are easily aroused to envy. They also become spoiled and tyrannical. But hire a former enemy and he will be more loyal than a friend, because he has more to prove. In fact, you have more to fear from friends than from enemies. If you have no enemies, find a way to make them."

What we don't want is for Trump to fill his cabinet positions with his friends simply because they're his friends. Sure, we want his appointees to be loyal, but he can inspire that loyalty far better in those who fear him than from those who love him -- don't forget what Machiavelli taught us:

Quote:“It is much safer to be feared than loved because love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.”

There's only one person I really don't want to see weasel his way into Trump's cabinet and that's Mitt Romney.

Post: #307

(12-01-2016 01:50 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Can the people who are super-upset at Mnuchin and Ross give us some names of people they would have preferred?

Treasury isn't like Housing and Urban Development, where you can just stick a guy there and he learns on the job. You would need to actually have some experience.

Who are some non-jewish, non-GS people that you would've preferred to have working there?

Contributor at the Libertarian Cato Institute John Allison would have been a much better pick than Mnuchin. We need sound money and we aren't going to get it with another Goldmann/Soros guy as treasury secretary.

I'm willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, but on the surface this pick is not a good one.

Post: #308

(12-01-2016 02:15 PM)eskimobobseal Wrote:  

(12-01-2016 01:50 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Can the people who are super-upset at Mnuchin and Ross give us some names of people they would have preferred?

Treasury isn't like Housing and Urban Development, where you can just stick a guy there and he learns on the job. You would need to actually have some experience.

Who are some non-jewish, non-GS people that you would've preferred to have working there?

Contributor at the Libertarian Cato Institute John Allison would have been a much better pick than Mnuchin. We need sound money and we aren't going to get it with another Goldmann/Soros guy as treasury secretary.

I'm willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, but on the surface this pick is not a good one.

I'm pretty sure Trump's life expectancy would've dropped significantly if he chose John Allison.

Anytime questions about the FED come up, I always think about this Bill Hicks video.

Post: #309

Allison seems like a bridge too far for me. Massive overhaul of our currency system, while it might or might not be a good idea, just isn't in the cards for term 1. There's way, way too much other stuff to do that's more pressing.

Post: #310

I don't trust the Cato Institute anymore. I don't trust the Kochs.

I still hope he takes on the Fed in some way.

Also, Breaking: Mattis named Sec of Defense

Post: #311

"Taking on the fed" was never in the cards. I don't think it's reasonable to blame Trump for not taking a radical position he never said he was going to take.

Post: #312

He's mentioned the Fed a few times actually. Even that much is something most others don't have the balls to do.

I actually sincerely think he is going to do atleast something about making the Fed more transparent, or cutting out existing collusion between the Fed/The Banks/Congress.

(12-01-2016 04:35 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  "Taking on the fed" was never in the cards. I don't think it's reasonable to blame Trump for not taking a radical position he never said he was going to take.

Post: #313

Donald Trump just chose fucking General Mad Dog Mattis for fucking SECDEF !!!!!

http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/do...-secretary

THIS IS YUGE !

Post: #314

Very happy with SecDef Mattis.

Everything I've seen indicates that the Trump administration's policy on war aligns exactly with my own.


No war.
Unless they really want a war.
Then they get lots and lots of war. More than they want.

Post: #315

I was very happy with the Ross pick (so was Ann Coulter). He was always on Trump's side on trade and now I'm very confident we're actually gonna do good deals for once.

Listen to his interview on Fox Business yesterday. You can tell he's ready to bust some heads in negotiating with China, on NAFTA, scrapping the TPP, etc. Trump promised no more political hacks negotiating for us, and Ross ain't no political hack. He's done this shit his entire life, and now he's doing it for the country.

I'm a bit wary about Mattis with his comments on Iran, but he's still a good pick.

1. We need some guy to beat the shit out of ISIS. Mattis is ready to go.
2. Mattis has always been opposed to these idiotic SJW social engineering experiments in the military and now I'm a lot more confident that this Obama-era idiocy is going to be rolled back. This is way more important in the long term than you think. We must not allow the SJW's to take over the military that they certainly want to use against us (however ineffectual it may wind up being under their control).
3. Mattis is not a politically correct pussy and recognizes political Islam for the long term strategic threat that it is. Read more here: https://thefederalist.com/2016/11/30/jam...ess-islam/
4. Morale in the military is low. Mattis is just the guy to restore it. He's already a legend.

Overall, a very good pick.

But as I said earlier today - THE FIGHT WE NEED TO MOBILIZE FOR IS IMMIGRATION!

POTUS Trump more or less has a very wide berth on trade and foreign policy. The fight we need to pick through Congress and in the public is on immigration. Taxes, Obamacare, that'll be later. We need to spend our capital first on immigration, right now. That's our goal for next year. It's the problem that needs to be solved RIGHT NOW.

Post: #316

SECDEF Mattis isn't a war monger, he won't go after Iran.

You can bet sure as shit he'll clean ISIS out if let loose.

Everyone adores that warrior monk bastard - he's an intelligent guy.

Trump and him will absolutely make a great team - also adds to Trumps cabinet credibility immensely.

Post: #317

Where did you guys get the Mattis news from.

Edit: nvm. still uncomfirmed though?

Post: #318

(12-01-2016 05:24 PM)kaotic Wrote:  SECDEF Mattis isn't a war monger, he won't go after Iran.

You can bet sure as shit he'll clean ISIS out if let loose.

Everyone adores that warrior monk bastard - he's an intelligent guy.

Trump and him will absolutely make a great team - also adds to Trumps cabinet credibility immensely.

I remember reading quotes from him a few years ago and thinking, "It's a shame someone so patently badass won't be at the highest level."

If true, this is absolutely fucking outstanding. I wasn't expecting the best election cycle to also be the most entertaining.

Post: #319

(12-01-2016 04:51 PM)kaotic Wrote:  Donald Trump just chose fucking General Mad Dog Mattis for fucking SECDEF !!!!!

http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/do...-secretary

THIS IS YUGE !

I'd like to say a prayer:

Blessed be the Mattis my rock. He trains my fingers for battle, my hands for war.

Mattis is my shepherd; I shall not want.

He maketh me to lie down cover fire at the cyclic rate in green pastures: he leadeth me into the raging amphibious assaults.

He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for our Corps' sake.

And Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for Mattis art with me; his Mortars and Naval Gunfire they comfort me.

Mattis preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: he anointest my head with blood; my beer stein runneth over.

Surely death and mercilessness shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the fields of Valhalla with my brothers and sisters forever.

In his name we slay.

Semper Fidelis

Post: #320

Q. What's green and glows in the dark?
A. Tehran after Mattis confirmation day.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #321

(12-01-2016 01:24 PM)Fast Eddie Wrote:  

(12-01-2016 11:12 AM)cibo Wrote:  You guys need to calm down everytime Trump does something slightly unexpected. He's done it so many times and won that I would have hoped he be given the benefit of the doubt by now.

Worst case, he fires the guy as he's shown he's willing do to since he's fired a bunch of campaign managers when they werent performing.

I would say the same in regards to your sentiment: you guys need to calm down every time someone displays even the slightest hint of displeasure over something Trump does.

We were ecstatic over the Sessions pick. Are you expecting us to be equally positive in regards to the Mnuchin pick? Are we supposed to react to every single one of Trump's moves with equal levels of enthusiasm, regardless of what those moves are, because of "the benefit of the doubt?"

If that's the case, why discuss this shit at all? Let's just all declare ourselves 100% pleased with anything and everything that happens from today until the end of Trump's administration and call it a day.

That's a nice strawman. I stated that "Hey trump's surprised us many times, let's wait a bit before we assume the worst". Not "you should never criticism trump".

Do you follow around your employees all the time even after that just delivered a massive win? And the moment they do something you don't like, which might because you don't understand their logic, you immediately put them on blast and fire them?

No you give more leeway to people who have done a good job which entitles them the opportunity to do things you might not agree with or understand here and there. This is seriously like management 101 here.

As for picking someone from Goldman, you and others don't seem to be aware how many people worked in finance that have different opinions than their company. The thing is, if you want to work in certain competitive industries and get the relevant experience, you have to suck it up and put your time in even if the company is a dick. Bannon worked at Goldman and went to Harvard which is like +95% liberal and he's very not liberal. While working in certain places can be a red flag, it's not a guarantee either.

Given Trump's past behavior of making great picks or at the very least firing them quickly, I think the overly dramatic view of Mnuchin is unreasonable.

Anyway, I hope you liked Mattis, since I do. I also won $100 on that bet.

Post: #322

(12-01-2016 10:25 PM)Paracelsus Wrote:  Q. What's green and glows in the dark?
A. Tehran after Mattis confirmation day.

I understand why you don't want to strengthen an Islamic theocracy like Iran, but on the other hand, what exactly is their threat to America or the West in general? They are pragmatic and non-aggressive and only really sponsor some Shia militia in Iraq and Lebanon, big whoop? In addition, Shia islam is never the cause of terrorism.

Post: #323

(12-02-2016 08:43 AM)nomadbrah Wrote:  They are pragmatic and non-aggressive and only really sponsor some Shia militia in Iraq and Lebanon, big whoop? In addition, Shia islam is never the cause of terrorism.

You forgot Syria, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, etc. They prefer to wage proxy, rather than direct wars.

Still, I'd rather USA not invade them.

Post: #324

Some Democrats are saber rattling saying they're going to try to block Mattis. My idiot feminist senator is one.

4D chess again. Trump is making his opponents look like idiots causing gridlock over a man that's highly respected in Washington and revered by the troops.

Post: #325

(12-02-2016 06:25 PM)Libertas Wrote:  Some Democrats are saber rattling saying they're going to try to block Mattis. My idiot feminist senator is one.

4D chess again. Trump is making his opponents look like idiots causing gridlock over a man that's highly respected in Washington and revered by the troops.

I can't wait to see them explain how having a guy wait 7 years, as opposed to 4, since he left the military is somehow "preserving civilian control of the military". Should be good popcorn.