There is plenty of retarded stuff Trump does to shit on him over (the stuff in the OP included), but this is just leftoid-tier criticism. Tariffs have already been raised across the board. Just because he is repeatedly using threats of even higher tariffs as a negotiating tactic, doesn't mean it's for insider trading. Anyone who believes tariffs are good should appreciate the net positve of all the trade commotion this year. And if you don't believe in tariffs and think there should be zero barrier to goods made by slaves in the third world, that's a different conversation entirely. The more understandable criticism would be he should go harder and raise them even more on certain countries, but the counterpoint to that would be that gradual bumps are less of a shock.
I made out like a bandit earlier this year because I saw through his negotiating tactics and all the media panic over tariffs and invested accordingly. I can attest to you that I am not in Trump's inner circle, but I've certainly been accused of being weirder things on this board...
Just because he is repeatedly using threats of even higher tariffs as a negotiating tactic, doesn't mean it's for insider trading.
But it may be. Who knows? Just because leftists say it, doesn't mean it's automatically false. There's so much BS surrounding Trump, it's almost impossible to figure out what's true and what's false. Leftists may be cultists and assume everything negative about him is true, but do I also have to be a cultist and assume that it's false?
Sure, but I'm responding to someone who seems oh so certain that it must be for insider trading. If there was some insider trading going on, I wouldn't be shocked. It's certainly greater than a 0% chance, perhaps even over 25%. But given the competing explanations and weak circumstantial evidence, I see no reason to think it's more than that, but that can always change. And of course, rogue insider trading wouldn't immediately imply systemic, intentional, sanctioned insider trading. Which is what that user was clearly insinuating is happening.
He’s not beating the allegations.
They are a cancer on our nation.
At least he's putting tariffs on countries so his inner circle can make a lot of profit on insider trading before he withdraws them again.
There is plenty of retarded stuff Trump does to shit on him over (the stuff in the OP included), but this is just leftoid-tier criticism. Tariffs have already been raised across the board. Just because he is repeatedly using threats of even higher tariffs as a negotiating tactic, doesn't mean it's for insider trading. Anyone who believes tariffs are good should appreciate the net positve of all the trade commotion this year. And if you don't believe in tariffs and think there should be zero barrier to goods made by slaves in the third world, that's a different conversation entirely. The more understandable criticism would be he should go harder and raise them even more on certain countries, but the counterpoint to that would be that gradual bumps are less of a shock.
I made out like a bandit earlier this year because I saw through his negotiating tactics and all the media panic over tariffs and invested accordingly. I can attest to you that I am not in Trump's inner circle, but I've certainly been accused of being weirder things on this board...
But it may be. Who knows? Just because leftists say it, doesn't mean it's automatically false. There's so much BS surrounding Trump, it's almost impossible to figure out what's true and what's false. Leftists may be cultists and assume everything negative about him is true, but do I also have to be a cultist and assume that it's false?
Sure, but I'm responding to someone who seems oh so certain that it must be for insider trading. If there was some insider trading going on, I wouldn't be shocked. It's certainly greater than a 0% chance, perhaps even over 25%. But given the competing explanations and weak circumstantial evidence, I see no reason to think it's more than that, but that can always change. And of course, rogue insider trading wouldn't immediately imply systemic, intentional, sanctioned insider trading. Which is what that user was clearly insinuating is happening.