Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

It's the Trump Tariff Cycle in play.  Threaten/Talk Tough - Markets Sells Off - Hint at a Deal - Market Rallies - No Progress - Repeat.  

Has there been any investigative journalism to see if there has been any pattern of shorting, and who it might be if there is?

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sidecar said:

Has there been any investigative journalism to see if there has been any pattern of shorting, and who it might be if there is?

Somebody is winning bigly...........probably warrants an investigation,  likely won't happen cause people are geting rich........very very rich

https://www.salon.com/2019/10/22/donald-trumps-big-short-is-the-president-profiting-off-the-market-chaos-he-creates/

Its a long read but some dubiuos shit is going down.....

 

Donald Trump's big short: Is the president profiting off the market chaos he creates?

There's a pattern of strange "chaos trades" tied to Trump's "trade war" blurts. It could be epic corruption

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
47
BOB CESCA
OCTOBER 22, 2019 1:10PM (UTC)
Unusual times demand unusual measures. If you value Salon's original reporting and commentary, please take a moment to support our writers directly. Right here, right now, you can make a direct contribution to Bob Cesca to help make his work possible. All donations go to our writers.

Back in early 2018, I noticed something hinky about the confluence of Donald Trump’s blurts about his trade war with the movement of the stock market. As I wrote in this space back in August, I believe Trump or people close to Trump might be profiting off the volatility of the markets ever since the president first declared a trade war against our allies and frenemies alike.

Since the passage of the 2009 stimulus, and with the exception of 2015, the markets have been mostly climbing steadily, in a relatively smooth upward slope. This ascending trajectory continued through the first year of Trump’s presidency until suddenly we began to observe harrowing single-day declines — volatility in the form of precipitous collapses of as much as 1,175 points off the Dow Jones average. 

In fact, the top five biggest single-day point declines in the history of the Dow have occurred on Trump’s watch, and all have occurred since February, 2018.

Coincidentally — or maybe not quite that — the president issued his first tariffs on Jan. 22, 2018, and the first gigantic market decline of his presidency happened two weeks later on Feb. 5: the aforementioned 1,175-point crash. However, there were smaller declines that began the day after the first tariff announcement. Since then, many of the biggest market gains or declines have occurred within days, sometimes within hours, of Trump’s various statements and tweets. 

When there’s good news from Trump’s yapper, the markets climb. When there’s bad news, the markets take a shit. Scanning the financial sites, traders and analysts alike have been clear about why the markets freaked out on each occasion, for better or worse, and the freak-outs have almost always coincided with a Trump blurt about trade. Hence the ongoing rollercoaster of market volatility since late January of 2018.

Vanity Fair’s William Cohan published a mind-blowing item last week that closely examined several “chaos trades” and the linkage between Trump’s blurts and the movement of the S&P 500. Sure enough, someone — or a connected group of someones — has been making super-colossal trades just prior to Trump’s announcements about the trade war. When I say “super-colossal,” I’m vastly understating the magnitude of the windfalls these trades have produced.

Cohan writes about one trade in which someone bought 82,000 “e-mini” contracts on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) just before the markets closed on Sept. 10. The following day, Trump announced a delay in implementing new tariffs on China, which was received as good news, thus launching the S&P skyward by 47 points to close at 3,016. The trader who ordered the 82,000 e-mini contracts, at $50 per contract multiplied by the 47-point gain, made a profit of around $190 million in one suspiciously miraculous day. If the investor’s last name isn't Kreskin, there’s no way of knowing that Trump would suddenly emerge with that announcement about China, unless the president or someone acquainted with his thinking alerted the investor. If that happened, Trump and the investor could be in a lot of trouble.

A $190 million profit earned on the knee-jerk whimsy of a Trump blurt is pocket lint compared with another suspicious trade that came down on June 28 when another mysterious someone bought a whopping 420,000 e-minis. At the G20 summit the very next day, following a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump told reporters that everything with China was hunky-dory. The next week, the S&P jumped 84 points, earning the mystery investor a nosebleed-inducing profit of $1.8 billion — that’s billion with a “b.” 

Then, on Aug. 23, according to Cohan, an unknown investor picked up 386,000 e-minis. On Aug. 26, during the G7 summit, we learned from the president that Chinese trade officials had called and told him they were ready to return to the negotiation table. On that news, the S&P jumped 80 points and the investor raked in a profit of $1.5 billion. It turned out, however, that Trump lied about the phone call. China’s negotiators hadn't called him at all. In other words, someone earned a sum of around half of Trump’s entire net worth based strictly on a Trump lie.

One CME veteran told Cohan, “There is definite hanky-panky going on, to the world’s financial markets’ detriment. This is abysmal.”

The Vanity Fair piece also described a short sale on the S&P that was, yet again, strangely linked to market movement triggered by the president. Briefly put, taking out a short position on a stock is a bet against the success of a stock. Turning a profit on a short sale requires the stock to drop in value. Some shorts end up driving a stock down even more than it would have fallen naturally. It’s a crappy but common investment strategy that frankly ought to be illegal. 

Words like “illegal,” “hanky-panky” and “abysmal” barely begin to describe the possibility that Trump might also be shorting the markets based on his tweets and the erratic fluffing of his trade negotiations. It doesn’t take a Wall Street genius to know that if there’s bad news for the markets, short positions can be quite lucrative. So, when we look at those massive one-day declines, moving on Trump’s unpredictable shrieking, it seems as if short positions, rather than traditional investments such as those immense e-mini orders Cohan described, would be the only investments to make in accordance with bad news from Trump — and the only person who really knows what Trump might say from moment to moment is Trump.

If the president is indeed shorting the markets, what does this say about his stewardship of the economy? Is his disregard for the health and prosperity of the financial markets, businesses and investors alike, so profound that he’s betting against their collective success and potentially profiting from their failure? I find it difficult to believe that the “forgotten men and women” had this in mind when they foolishly set loose such an unapologetic disruption agent upon the world.

Is the president even capable of knowingly manipulating the stock market? You’re damn right he is. You might recall a massive investigation by the New York Times indicating that Trump engaged in a scheme with his dad, Fred Trump, known as “greenmailing”:

During the 1980s, Donald Trump became notorious for leaking word that he was taking positions in stocks, hinting of a possible takeover, and then either selling on the run-up or trying to extract lucrative concessions from the target company to make him go away. It was a form of stock manipulation with an unsavory label: “greenmailing.” The Times unearthed evidence that Mr. Trump enlisted his father as his greenmailing wingman.

So there’s no denying that he’s wired for this awfulness. Additionally, knowing his history with Wall Street combined with the obvious impact of his yawps, he’d have to be in a coma not to notice the power he possesses over the markets. It also goes without saying he’s not personally making these trades. He could merely be tipping off a trusted ally who, him- or herself, might be several hops removed from the actual broker of the trades. Remember: Trump moves like a gangster, and, as we learned in "The Godfather: Part II," the boss has “a lotta buffas.”

Or there’s always the possibility that this is a wild coincidence, and that the one honorable thing Trump’s ever done in his life is to ignore his ability to blurt things that move the markets, whether soaring through the roof or collapsing into the basement. 

Given that he’s been transparently profiting off the presidency by dragging his entire motorcade to his resorts in Bedminster or Sterling or Mar-a-lago on an almost weekly basis; by hosting 500 Saudis at Trump International; by sending Air Force transports to the financially struggling airfield closest to his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland and ordering the airmen to stay overnight at the resort; by announcing that next year’s G7 would he held at Trump Doral in Miami (until be backpedaled), and all the rest of it, does he really seem like a man who’s loath to profiteer off his presidency? 

Bear in mind, too, that Trump referred to the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution as the “phony emoluments clause” during remarks in the cabinet room on Monday. Make no mistake: He knows it exists, he just has zero respect for its existence.

It’s impossible to know incriminating details about these trades from public records. So perhaps an entity with subpoena power and oversight of the financial markets, something like Rep. Maxine Waters' Financial Services Committee, or Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s subcommittee, should take a closer look. If it bears out under scrutiny, we’re talking about serious felonies and at least a handful of additional articles of impeachment on the table. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry.  Barr has determined the President is allowed to be as corrupt as he wants.   As long as he doesn't channel the corruption through a non immune intermediary (Pillow talk with his daughter) no crime is possible.  The Justice Department has not yet told us if the Royal Family is also exempt from all concerns of a criminal nature.   Since his daughter is his right hand, his sons are his left thumb and middle finger, and since a body cannot be forced to testify against itself, its only reasonable to assume they are indeed also immune to all matters of ethics or criminality.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

Somebody is winning bigly...........probably warrants an investigation,  likely won't happen cause people are geting rich........very very rich

https://www.salon.com/2019/10/22/donald-trumps-big-short-is-the-president-profiting-off-the-market-chaos-he-creates/

Its a long read but some dubiuos shit is going down.....

 

Donald Trump's big short: Is the president profiting off the market chaos he creates?

There's a pattern of strange "chaos trades" tied to Trump's "trade war" blurts. It could be epic corruption

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
47
BOB CESCA
OCTOBER 22, 2019 1:10PM (UTC)

Unusual times demand unusual measures. If you value Salon's original reporting and commentary, please take a moment to support our writers directly. Right here, right now, you can make a direct contribution to Bob Cesca to help make his work possible. All donations go to our writers.

Back in early 2018, I noticed something hinky about the confluence of Donald Trump’s blurts about his trade war with the movement of the stock market. As I wrote in this space back in August, I believe Trump or people close to Trump might be profiting off the volatility of the markets ever since the president first declared a trade war against our allies and frenemies alike.

Since the passage of the 2009 stimulus, and with the exception of 2015, the markets have been mostly climbing steadily, in a relatively smooth upward slope. This ascending trajectory continued through the first year of Trump’s presidency until suddenly we began to observe harrowing single-day declines — volatility in the form of precipitous collapses of as much as 1,175 points off the Dow Jones average. 

In fact, the top five biggest single-day point declines in the history of the Dow have occurred on Trump’s watch, and all have occurred since February, 2018.

Coincidentally — or maybe not quite that — the president issued his first tariffs on Jan. 22, 2018, and the first gigantic market decline of his presidency happened two weeks later on Feb. 5: the aforementioned 1,175-point crash. However, there were smaller declines that began the day after the first tariff announcement. Since then, many of the biggest market gains or declines have occurred within days, sometimes within hours, of Trump’s various statements and tweets. 

When there’s good news from Trump’s yapper, the markets climb. When there’s bad news, the markets take a shit. Scanning the financial sites, traders and analysts alike have been clear about why the markets freaked out on each occasion, for better or worse, and the freak-outs have almost always coincided with a Trump blurt about trade. Hence the ongoing rollercoaster of market volatility since late January of 2018.

Vanity Fair’s William Cohan published a mind-blowing item last week that closely examined several “chaos trades” and the linkage between Trump’s blurts and the movement of the S&P 500. Sure enough, someone — or a connected group of someones — has been making super-colossal trades just prior to Trump’s announcements about the trade war. When I say “super-colossal,” I’m vastly understating the magnitude of the windfalls these trades have produced.

Cohan writes about one trade in which someone bought 82,000 “e-mini” contracts on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) just before the markets closed on Sept. 10. The following day, Trump announced a delay in implementing new tariffs on China, which was received as good news, thus launching the S&P skyward by 47 points to close at 3,016. The trader who ordered the 82,000 e-mini contracts, at $50 per contract multiplied by the 47-point gain, made a profit of around $190 million in one suspiciously miraculous day. If the investor’s last name isn't Kreskin, there’s no way of knowing that Trump would suddenly emerge with that announcement about China, unless the president or someone acquainted with his thinking alerted the investor. If that happened, Trump and the investor could be in a lot of trouble.

A $190 million profit earned on the knee-jerk whimsy of a Trump blurt is pocket lint compared with another suspicious trade that came down on June 28 when another mysterious someone bought a whopping 420,000 e-minis. At the G20 summit the very next day, following a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump told reporters that everything with China was hunky-dory. The next week, the S&P jumped 84 points, earning the mystery investor a nosebleed-inducing profit of $1.8 billion — that’s billion with a “b.” 

Then, on Aug. 23, according to Cohan, an unknown investor picked up 386,000 e-minis. On Aug. 26, during the G7 summit, we learned from the president that Chinese trade officials had called and told him they were ready to return to the negotiation table. On that news, the S&P jumped 80 points and the investor raked in a profit of $1.5 billion. It turned out, however, that Trump lied about the phone call. China’s negotiators hadn't called him at all. In other words, someone earned a sum of around half of Trump’s entire net worth based strictly on a Trump lie.

One CME veteran told Cohan, “There is definite hanky-panky going on, to the world’s financial markets’ detriment. This is abysmal.”

The Vanity Fair piece also described a short sale on the S&P that was, yet again, strangely linked to market movement triggered by the president. Briefly put, taking out a short position on a stock is a bet against the success of a stock. Turning a profit on a short sale requires the stock to drop in value. Some shorts end up driving a stock down even more than it would have fallen naturally. It’s a crappy but common investment strategy that frankly ought to be illegal. 

Words like “illegal,” “hanky-panky” and “abysmal” barely begin to describe the possibility that Trump might also be shorting the markets based on his tweets and the erratic fluffing of his trade negotiations. It doesn’t take a Wall Street genius to know that if there’s bad news for the markets, short positions can be quite lucrative. So, when we look at those massive one-day declines, moving on Trump’s unpredictable shrieking, it seems as if short positions, rather than traditional investments such as those immense e-mini orders Cohan described, would be the only investments to make in accordance with bad news from Trump — and the only person who really knows what Trump might say from moment to moment is Trump.

If the president is indeed shorting the markets, what does this say about his stewardship of the economy? Is his disregard for the health and prosperity of the financial markets, businesses and investors alike, so profound that he’s betting against their collective success and potentially profiting from their failure? I find it difficult to believe that the “forgotten men and women” had this in mind when they foolishly set loose such an unapologetic disruption agent upon the world.

Is the president even capable of knowingly manipulating the stock market? You’re damn right he is. You might recall a massive investigation by the New York Times indicating that Trump engaged in a scheme with his dad, Fred Trump, known as “greenmailing”:

During the 1980s, Donald Trump became notorious for leaking word that he was taking positions in stocks, hinting of a possible takeover, and then either selling on the run-up or trying to extract lucrative concessions from the target company to make him go away. It was a form of stock manipulation with an unsavory label: “greenmailing.” The Times unearthed evidence that Mr. Trump enlisted his father as his greenmailing wingman.

So there’s no denying that he’s wired for this awfulness. Additionally, knowing his history with Wall Street combined with the obvious impact of his yawps, he’d have to be in a coma not to notice the power he possesses over the markets. It also goes without saying he’s not personally making these trades. He could merely be tipping off a trusted ally who, him- or herself, might be several hops removed from the actual broker of the trades. Remember: Trump moves like a gangster, and, as we learned in "The Godfather: Part II," the boss has “a lotta buffas.”

Or there’s always the possibility that this is a wild coincidence, and that the one honorable thing Trump’s ever done in his life is to ignore his ability to blurt things that move the markets, whether soaring through the roof or collapsing into the basement. 

Given that he’s been transparently profiting off the presidency by dragging his entire motorcade to his resorts in Bedminster or Sterling or Mar-a-lago on an almost weekly basis; by hosting 500 Saudis at Trump International; by sending Air Force transports to the financially struggling airfield closest to his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland and ordering the airmen to stay overnight at the resort; by announcing that next year’s G7 would he held at Trump Doral in Miami (until be backpedaled), and all the rest of it, does he really seem like a man who’s loath to profiteer off his presidency? 

Bear in mind, too, that Trump referred to the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution as the “phony emoluments clause” during remarks in the cabinet room on Monday. Make no mistake: He knows it exists, he just has zero respect for its existence.

It’s impossible to know incriminating details about these trades from public records. So perhaps an entity with subpoena power and oversight of the financial markets, something like Rep. Maxine Waters' Financial Services Committee, or Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s subcommittee, should take a closer look. If it bears out under scrutiny, we’re talking about serious felonies and at least a handful of additional articles of impeachment on the table. 

Trump is too stupid to do that but boy oh boy Manuchin, Ross and their pals are loading up at the gravy train.

Saudi and Putin as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, garuda3 said:

Trump can pick on women young and old,

But he's no match for the Dictators of the world:

"Trump halts new China tariffs and rolls back some of the prior duties on $120 billion of imports"/> as per CNBC

It just might have something to do with Christmas sales:rolleyes:

Trumpetts don't believe Trump lies Mexico pays for the wall 

When that pair of Runners they were going to buy the Kid is suddenly 25% more expensive..Reality may well dawn.

The hip pocket nerve is even more powerful than and orange haired liar with a bad spray tan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, chum said:

I don’t give a shit, as long as China comes out on top! Life will be so much better after Chinese world dominance. I can’t wait for China to be the preeminent superpower. Go China! 

Help me out here Random!

They’ll  be better at it than we were., and for longer as well. One world government, with single payer will be the natural next step

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets see what president open trade with China?

Today, the U.S. has an open-trade policy with China, which means goods are traded freely between the two countries, but it wasn't always this way. On February 21, 1972, President Richard M. Nixon arrived in China for an official trip.
and what president was impeached after trade dealings with china!
you can't make this shit up
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fakenews said:

They’ll  be better at it than we were., and for longer as well.

Yes. Life under Chinese rule is a hoot from what I can tell. I’m thinking of emigrating there actually. Does China allow immigration? Maybe I’ll just swim over and look for a job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, chum said:

I don’t give a shit, as long as China comes out on top! Life will be so much better after Chinese world dominance. I can’t wait for China to be the preeminent superpower. Go China! 

Help me out here Random!

We are doing all we can to help over here. Our leaders are gobbling chong cock as fast as they can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lark said:

 The Justice Department has not yet told us if the Royal Family is also exempt from all concerns of a criminal nature.  

The Queen herself is the only member of the royal family that cannot be charged with a crime. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chum said:

Yes. Life under Chinese rule is a hoot from what I can tell. I’m thinking of emigrating there actually. Does China allow immigration? Maybe I’ll just swim over and look for a job.

China has expanding borders. The Silk Road is an early manifestation of their plans for world domination. Stay where you are and you’ll be absorbed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, spankoka said:

The Queen herself is the only member of the royal family that cannot be charged with a crime. 

Ah, but that is the English monarchy.   I’m referring the the American democracy

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chum said:

It might take too long, I want to get to work in an Apple factory or rice field as fast as I can! 

China is in need of workers as their population ages so you might be in luck. I suspect that they might want you to have at least a working knowledge of Mandarin. I assume you are in need of tutelage in this regard, so get started. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

That’s what your boy Shitstain is doing chum-p, making sure they come out ahead. Now plop you’re fatass back with the big gulp beer in your f350 and turn up Limbaugh 

He not that high up the food chain. He likely drives a beater Ridgeline.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As usual, demonstrably wrong on most counts. I’m 6 ft, 200 lbs of twisted steel and sex appeal, and I drive a big sexy Ram. If it makes you feel better about your soft selves to picture me that way though, have at it! :lol:

Whats the problem here anyway, aim a fanboi of your Chicom hero’s too!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m anxious to see China in a position of world dominance,  just like some of the posters here. They’ll be so much better at it, as was said above. Now we also have Ping for life, what could be better?!

Communism is the dream man!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with this trade war was there was NO game plan , including what to do from the coin toss to the 2 minute warning Seems like our great leader tweeted one morning on the bowl , lets have a trade war , we'll win , never consulting , his aides ( to busy firing them) US business's , and even the people in proverty that it would effect the most.  Seems like this weeks trade deal , benefits china the most, but donnie claiming it a victory? to boost the stock market, ( not everyone is in the market)

Tarriff's are nothing more then a taxed passed on to the american people, ie; put a tarriff on an Iphone , 20% , then Apple just raises the price of the phone 20%, so who gets hurt?  below from CNBC: The US-China trade deal leaves a large American deficit and a permanent collision course

  • Unacceptably large U.S. trade deficits with China will continue in the absence of Beijing’s firm commitment to balance the bilateral trade flows.
  • Trade spats will grind on, and so will political and security disputes as the U.S.-China strategic competition continues unabated.
  • Markets will have to take that in stride, focusing on the fact that asset prices are determined by the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy.
  • https://www.cnbc.com/2019/12/16/commentary-the-us-china-trade-deal-leaves-a-large-american-deficit.html.
my opinion: potus should focus of important issue , not that 16 year old beat him out for cover of TIME!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chum said:

Good for them. They have been very responsible with their defense spending keeping it below 2% of GDP (we are at a wasteful 3.5%) since 2000. The fact that they are building out their navy with such constraints is impressive. 
 

Another example of economic wars having unintended and kinetic consequences.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fakenews said:

Good for them. They have been very responsible with their defense spending keeping it below 2% of GDP (we are at a wasteful 3.5%) since 2000. The fact that they are building out their navy with such constraints is impressive. 
 

Another example of economic wars having unintended and kinetic consequences.

I reckon it's easier to live within military cost constraints when you don't have to siphon a percentage off the top of the money pool to go to your Best Citizens first. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

I reckon it's easier to live within military cost constraints when you don't have to siphon a percentage off the top of the money pool to go to your Best Citizens first. 

True!  If they find their best citizens behaving badly they're likely to be jailed or disappeared no matter their station.  If only Ghouliani was a Chinese citizen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fakenews said:

Perhaps the reason we are losing bigly in the Trade wars is because our POTUS is a horrible businessman and negotiator.  His only tool is bankruptcy.  
 

My reasonable solution? Drop kick the turd to the curb.

Couldn't said it better,

Bankuptcy is probably why he doesn't want his taxes released, Wonder what lets he's hiding?

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Pun Slinger said:

If what you say is true, have you considered why?

if the US is  united behind any president it makes them more credible in negotiations with foreign governments. If in contrast the president is under siege and his/her party is headed into an election year he/she might sign a deal with an Iran or China just to look good. 

Any chance enough of us could realize we all live in the same country and"United" is not just a name but a concept? 

The real question , why isn't the president behind ALL americans.? Every Tweet he mades slams/belittles some one! From our past presidents, to our war hero's, to our generals and Admirals , to our elected senators / Reps. and the list goes on. 

Every one hates hims cause he hates everyone ( cult followers not included)

He could have been a great president but choose not to!

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, garuda3 said:

The real question , why isn't the president behind ALL americans.? Every Tweet he mades slams/belittles some one! From our past presidents, to our war hero's, to our generals and Admirals , to our elected senators / Reps. and the list goes on. 

Every one hates hims cause he hates everyone ( cult followers not included)

He could have been a great president but choose not to!

Trump does not have any of the qualities to be even a mediocre president. He does have what it takes to be the Worst President of All Time, however.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Trump does not have any of the qualities to be even a mediocre president. human being. He does have what it takes to be the Worst President of All Time, however.

FTFY

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pun Slinger said:

It is the nature of New Yonkers to be combative. The media is aware and it makes for news so they play along and encourage it.

The left is beside themselves because Trump handles his own push back and does it on his terms via tweets which bypass the spin filter of the left leaning media. 

Obama and other presidents all attack their opponents viciously. The only difference is that they hide behind attack dog proxies. You are being dishonest if you think Trump is alone in this. 

Trump is the more hones politician in this regard.

First as an X New Yorker , there are may great NYer's , that are kind and careing, and not combative like DT and guillani, secondly there's an old saying :Origin and meaning of "You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar" From what I understand now, this phrase would indicate that You make more friends by being nice than by being rude,  guess his parents never taught him that? and why pick on a 16 year old girl that made a Magazine cover and he didn't. Think he learned how to treat 16 old girls from hanging out with Epstien?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...