Shadowgate

Ipso

Great stuff

ohnonotgmail

Ipso wrote: »

There's a current conspiracy in the news; Bannon and some Trump lackey are facing fraud charges relating to the privately build border wall. I'm sure d'deep state made them do it.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Which is really just a small diversion from allegations that the current President of the United States is conspiring with his own party and the head of the US postal service to sabotage the next election. But apparently these types of conspiracies just aren't sexy enough.

Bannon was arrested by US Postal Service agents which i thought was a nice touch.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Apparently Alex Jones has cut ties with her. Roger Stone was accused in this documentary and Alex got upset about it, that's what i am reading online. This event made Millie lot of money so i doubt she's that pissed off losing the Alex gig.

You don't mess with Roger Stone.

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Bannon was arrested by US Postal Service agents which i thought was a nice touch.

Nancy Pelosi net worth is 120 million to 140 million, do people honestly believe she made that kind of money from her salary? They're all corrupt but Bannon an easy target because he allied with Trump a few years ago.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Nancy Pelosi net worth is 120 million to 140 million, do people honestly believe she made that kind of money from her salary? They're all corrupt but Bannon an easy target because he allied with Trump a few years ago.

Bannon is shameless scum. A horrid human.

Well worth a watch.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Nancy Pelosi net worth is 120 million to 140 million, do people honestly believe she made that kind of money from her salary?

She didn't make her fortune from her salary, which is around $220,000 per year, most of it comes from real estate investment with her husband
https://moneyinc.com/nancy-pelosi-net-worth/

They're all corrupt but Bannon an easy target because he allied with Trump a few years ago.

They aren't "all corrupt", there are plenty of politicians on all sides who have legitimately made their money. This type of comment is just another example of your lazy thinking and generalisations connected to your world views.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

She didn't make her fortune from her salary, which is around $220,000 per year, most of it comes from real estate investment with her husband
https://moneyinc.com/nancy-pelosi-net-worth/



They aren't "all corrupt", there are plenty of politicians on all sides who have legitimately made their money. This type of comment is just another example of your lazy thinking and generalisations connected to your world views.

Dohnjoe is defending corruption when it's the side he supports. That's her wealth not her husbands fortune. How did she accumulate 140 million from a salary of 200,000 a year? Dohnjoe will not look further into this beyond what he reads on website supporting her.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Dohnjoe is defending corruption when it's the side he supports. That's her wealth not her husbands fortune. How did she accumulate 140 million from a salary of 200,000 a year? Dohnjoe will not look further into this beyond what he reads on website supporting her.

Lol.

Also have people given up trying to defend this bull**** artist and her bull**** documentary now?

ohnonotgmail

King Mob wrote: »

Lol.

Also have people given up trying to defend this bull**** artist and her bull**** documentary now?

all quietly forgotten about. still, raising $170,000 to pay for your legal fees when you rob and assault your mother is a nice grift.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Nancy Pelosi net worth is 120 million to 140 million, do people honestly believe she made that kind of money from her salary? They're all corrupt but Bannon an easy target because he allied with Trump a few years ago.

what does that have to do with bannon being arrested?

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

all quietly forgotten about. still, raising $170,000 to pay for your legal fees when you rob and assault your mother is a nice grift.

The mother claims she dropped the charges against her daughter in May. For whatever reason, the State of Ohio decided to still prosecute a family matter case by secret indictment in July and only arrest her in August (the week her video got released) There some unusual things happening here no matter how much you want to downplay it.

Yes there was enough suckers to pay her legal fees

Yes Millie according to the story tackled her mother to the ground, but the state still has not revealed why they decided to pursue a familiy matter case after the mother had dropped all charges?

I only watched 20 minutes of the video, before it got taken down for Hate Speech on Youtube. What said in the rest of the video was hateful?

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

The mother claims she dropped the charges against her daughter in May. For whatever reason, the State of Ohio decided to still prosecute a family matter case by secret indictment in July and only arrest her in August (the week her video got released) There some unusual things happening here no matter how much you want to downplay it.

Yes there was enough suckers to pay her legal fees

Yes Millie according to the story tackled her mother to the ground, but the state still has not revealed why they decided to pursue a familiy matter case after the mother had dropped all charges?

I only watched 20 minutes of the video, before it got taken down for Hate Speech on Youtube. What said in the rest of the video was hateful?

Or maybe it's bull**** and you just don't understand the details of the case and of law in a different country.
But then:
Cheerspring will not look further into this beyond what he reads on website supporting her

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what does that have to do with bannon being arrested?

You licking lips Bannon was arrested ok be happy your side won a victory today. Just pointing out you could arrest many others beside Bannon for fraud and insider trading.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You licking lips Bannon was arrested ok be happy your side won a victory today.
.

are you not happy that a man that defrauded people will face consequences for what he did? presumably you are inplying that you are on Bannons side.

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Just pointing out you could arrest many others beside Bannon for fraud and insider trading.

i presume you have some actual evidence that pelosi is involved in fraud and insider trading?

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are you not happy that a man that defrauded people will face consequences for what he did? presumably you are inplying that you are on Bannons side.



i presume you have some actual evidence that pelosi is involved in fraud and insider trading?

I have no skin in the game. Bannon arrest doesn't surprise me. Difference between me and you, i know both parties are at it. Do you honestly believe democrats don't cheat and steal like Republicans?

The biggest fraud occurring right now with trillions being handed out to investors who trade the stock markets.

1.1 million signed on for unemployment benefits, this week, despite 7 trillion or more got printed by the FED. Why are the democrats and republicans not asking where the money gone?

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I have no skin in the game. Bannon arrest doesn't surprise me. Difference between me and you, i know both parties are at it. Do you honestly believe democrats don't cheat and steal like Republicans?

The biggest fraud occurring right now with trillions being handed out to investors who trade the stock markets.

1.1 million signed on for unemployment benefits despite 7 trillion or more got printed by the FED. Why are the democrats and republicans not asking where the money gone?

So no evidence.
Just your own personal incredulity and expertise.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I have no skin in the game. Bannon arrest doesn't surprise me. Difference between me and you, i know both parties are at it. Do you honestly believe democrats don't cheat and steal like Republicans?

The biggest fraud occurring right now with trillions being handed out to investors who trade the stock markets.

1.1 million signed on for unemployment benefits, this week, despite 7 trillion or more got printed by the FED. Why are the democrats and republicans not asking where the money gone?

where is your evidence of fraud by pelosi? you named her specifically so you must have had a reason for mentioning her.

Dohnjoe

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Dohnjoe is defending corruption when it's the side he supports. That's her wealth not her husbands fortune. How did she accumulate 140 million from a salary of 200,000 a year? Dohnjoe will not look further into this beyond what he reads on website supporting her.

To explain your thought process and the faults here..

You discovered that Pelosi has a lot of money, it's quite a lot more than what she would make from a career in politics, however you don't bother to find out the reason why (ignorance), so you jumped straight to the suspicion that she is corrupt. This is faulty thinking.

That faulty thinking is based on this underlying false notion you have that "all politicians are corrupt". Which is a personal world view you hold, a false one.

It's a crystal clear example of how faulty world views combined with ignorance quickly leads to faulty thinking

(and knowing you, now this faulty suspicion has cemented as a "fact" in your mind)

Likewise Donald Trump has a lot of wealth, Bernie Sanders, the Obama's - it doesn't automatically mean they are all corrupt. Each is a case-by-case basis.

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i presume you have some actual evidence that pelosi is involved in fraud and insider trading?

Too powerful a lady to bring down. From time to time some journalists will ask hard questions about things they find.

Love CNN saying "soft corruption" they are so transparent in their downplay.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi fired back Sunday at a CBS News' "60 Minutes" report that highlighted several instances of what it suggested could be "soft corruption."
The show looked at the investments of various lawmakers -- including Pelosi, House Speaker John Boehner and Republican Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama -- who reportedly bought stocks around the same time legislation involving those investments was being discussed.

https://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/13/politics/60-minutes-pelosi/index.html

ohnonotgmail

Dohnjoe wrote: »

To explain your thought process and the faults here..

You discovered that Pelosi has a lot of money, it's quite a lot more than what she would make from a career in politics, however you don't bother to find out the reason why (ignorance), so you jumped straight to the suspicion that she is corrupt. This is faulty thinking.

That faulty thinking is based on this underlying false notion you have that "all politicians are corrupt". Which is a personal world view you hold, a false one.

It's a crystal clear example of how faulty world views combined with ignorance quickly leads to faulty thinking

(and knowing you, now this faulty suspicion has cemented as a "fact" in your mind)

Likewise Donald Trump has a lot of wealth, Bernie Sanders, the Obama's - it doesn't automatically mean they are all corrupt. Each is a case-by-case basis.

and it was bizarrely just thrown out in a response to a post about steve bannon.

King Mob

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Likewise Donald Trump has a lot of wealth, Bernie Sanders, the Obama's - it doesn't automatically mean they are all corrupt. Each is a case-by-case basis.

Same with Alex Jones and other conspiracy peddlers he subscribes to.
And now, after this grift, the bull**** artist behind this pretend documentary.

But that doesn't apply to those people, because he has to preserve belief in them as it's not possible they are wrong or corrupt. Because they are conspiracy theorists.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Too powerful a lady to bring down. From time to time some journalists will ask hard questions about things they find.

Love CNN saying "soft corruption" they are so transparent in their downplay.



https://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/13/politics/60-minutes-pelosi/index.html

that is it? that is all you have? pathetic even for you.

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is it? that is all you have? pathetic even for you.

You know insider trading illegal right? pathetic you will downplay corruption by either side.

Obviously, the reason insider trading is illegal is because it gives the insider an unfair advantage in the market, puts the interests of the insider above those to whom he or she owes a fiduciary duty, and allows an insider to artificially influence the value of a company's stocks.

Why bother with laws then?
https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/what-is-insider-trading-and-why-is-it-illegal-31598

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You know insider trading illegal right? pathetic you will downplay corruption by either side.



Why bother with laws then?
https://www.hg.org/legal-articles/what-is-insider-trading-and-why-is-it-illegal-31598

there was nothing to suggest it was insider trading. nothing. It was an IPO. thousands of people probably bought shares in the same offering. for it to be insider trading pelosi would have to have some inside knowledge not available to the public. there is no suggestion of what that knowledge might be. I'd say you were googling furiously after mentioning pelosi in the hope of finding something, anything, some piece of dirt to throw around. sad.

King Mob

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I'd say you were googling furiously after mentioning pelosi in the hope of finding something, anything, some piece of dirt to throw around. sad.

And also the definition of insider trading.

Cheerful Spring2

Dohnjoe wrote: »

To explain your thought process and the faults here..

You discovered that Pelosi has a lot of money, it's quite a lot more than what she would make from a career in politics, however you don't bother to find out the reason why (ignorance), so you jumped straight to the suspicion that she is corrupt. This is faulty thinking.

That faulty thinking is based on this underlying false notion you have that "all politicians are corrupt". Which is a personal world view you hold, a false one.

It's a crystal clear example of how faulty world views combined with ignorance quickly leads to faulty thinking

(and knowing you, now this faulty suspicion has cemented as a "fact" in your mind)

Likewise Donald Trump has a lot of wealth, Bernie Sanders, the Obama's - it doesn't automatically mean they are all corrupt. Each is a case-by-case basis.

Faulty thinking believing she could earn that wealth from earning only 200,000 a year. How does she earn 140 million.

10 years in the job, she still only would have earned 2 miliion + (not taxed income)

She's corrupt, and not that difficult to see why.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Faulty thinking believing she could earn that wealth from earning only 200,000 a year. How does she earn 140 million.

10 years in the job, she still only would have earned 2 miliion + (not taxed income)

She's corrupt, and not that difficult to see why.

she was nearly 50 before she entered politics. and the 140M (some sites say 120M) is shared with her husband.

Cheerful Spring2

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there was nothing to suggest it was insider trading. nothing. It was an IPO. thousands of people probably bought shares in the same offering. for it to be insider trading pelosi would have to have some inside knowledge not available to the public. there is no suggestion of what that knowledge might be. I'd say you were googling furiously after mentioning pelosi in the hope of finding something, anything, some piece of dirt to throw around. sad.

Can you read

The show looked at the investments of various lawmakers -- including Pelosi, House Speaker John Boehner and Republican Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama -- who reportedly bought stocks around the same time legislation involving those investments was being discussed.

King Mob

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Can you read

Again Cheerful, you struggle to use correct grammar and language.
You shouldn't be questioning people's ability to read.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Can you read

i can read perfectly well thanks. and i presume you know what that legislation was and that it would be beneficial to the credit card companies? but of course the existence of that legislation was public knowledge. all legislation going through congress is public knowledge. so what private information did Pelosi have?