Trump

[kallend 2,166]

TACO

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/08/11/china-tariffs-delayed-again/

[Phil1111 1,189]

10 hours ago, kallend said:

TACO

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/08/11/china-tariffs-delayed-again/

On Friday, the price of gold futures jumped to a record high after it was reported that the US would put tariffs on imports of 1kg bars.

Monday: Price of gold eases after Trump rules out tariffs on imported bars

Metal traders say crisis averted after US president clarifies on social media that gold bars are duty-free

The price of gold has eased after Donald Trump announced tariffs would not be placed on gold bars.

His social media statement on Monday put an end to uncertainty, which had caused panic in global trade of the precious metal.

Sounds like the Trump crime family needed to make some quick cash in the commodities markets.

Edited August 12 by Phil1111

[normiss 901]

2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

On Friday, the price of gold futures jumped to a record high after it was reported that the US would put tariffs on imports of 1kg bars.

Monday: Price of gold eases after Trump rules out tariffs on imported bars

Metal traders say crisis averted after US president clarifies on social media that gold bars are duty-free

The price of gold has eased after Donald Trump announced tariffs would not be placed on gold bars.

His social media statement on Monday put an end to uncertainty, which had caused panic in global trade of the precious metal.

Sounds like the Trump crime family needed to make some quick cash in the commodities markets.

According to some recent reports, he has already grifted BILLION$ in his short time as The Great Pedo Felon

[jakee 1,601]

3 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

His social media statement on Monday put an end to uncertainty,

Can we all just take a moment to appreciate the hilarity of any professional journalist or trader believing that Trump’s social media feed provides ‘certainty’?

[JoeWeber 2,963]

On 8/11/2025 at 9:34 AM, jaybird18c said:

Oh….so they fake the videos across all the news agencies. I’m not actually seeing the people do what they do. I guess it could be fake. Nothing to see here… We’ll just go with your explanation.

Did you bother to notice that your hero President, against prison rules for pedophiles, had Ghislane Maxwell transferred to a fenceless minimum security prison camp? And that's not all. Her status is security level OUT. That means she can leave for the day to work etc. and just come back to sleep. Let me guess, you see nothing wrong with that, nor can you see Trumps hand in it, nor can you possibly imagine that Trump got something in exchange for it.

[JerryBaumchen 1,471]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Did you bother to notice that your hero President, against prison rules for pedophiles, had Ghislane Maxwell transferred to a fenceless minimum security prison camp? And that's not all. Her status is security level OUT. That means she can leave for the day to work etc. and just come back to sleep. Let me guess, you see nothing wrong with that, nor can you see Trumps hand in it, nor can you possibly imagine that Trump got something in exchange for it.

Hi Joe,

One thing is for sure; Trump will not do a damn thing for anybody unless he got something in exchange for it.

Jerry Baumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,471]

Hi folks,

This should scare every one of us:  Trump administration . . . plans to set up a 600-person National Guard “quick reaction force” 

Trump administration considers quick reaction force for protests

IMO it a first step in controlling the US population.  All he has to do is declare any city as unruly & send in the military.

As I keep saying:  Shades of the Third Reich.

What's next; martial law in this country?

Jerry Baumchen

[kallend 2,166]

11 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi folks,

This should scare every one of us:  Trump administration . . . plans to set up a 600-person National Guard “quick reaction force” 

Trump administration considers quick reaction force for protests

IMO it a first step in controlling the US population.  All he has to do is declare any city as unruly & send in the military.

As I keep saying:  Shades of the Third Reich.

What's next; martial law in this country?

Jerry Baumchen

How is a military "Quick Reaction Force" to deal with civil unrest any different from martial law already?

[kaiser 20]

On 6/10/2024 at 10:09 PM, tkhayes said:

Bullshit. China does not run on US dollars

India does not run on US dollars 

Africa does not run on US dollars

that is half the worlds population 

how fucking absolutely American arrogance you display. 

“Bukowski” The art how to live with idiots. It’s a challenge to live with those Americans that fly a swastika symbol and in support of a narcissist validating hatred in all those miserable Americans. 

[BIGUN 1,497]

4 hours ago, kallend said:

How is a military "Quick Reaction Force" to deal with civil unrest any different from martial law already?

Very slippery slope.   

[Phil1111 1,189]

16 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi folks,

This should scare every one of us:  Trump administration . . . plans to set up a 600-person National Guard “quick reaction force” 

Trump administration considers quick reaction force for protests

IMO it a first step in controlling the US population.  All he has to do is declare any city as unruly & send in the military.

As I keep saying:  Shades of the Third Reich.

What's next; martial law in this country?

Jerry Baumchen

"What's next; martial law in this country?"

Only if its a "national emergency".

[thelivo 16]

Trump administration accuses UK of failing to uphold human rights | Trump administration | The Guardian https://share.google/hOocA0MZz3Lrzkzaj

 

Every accusation is an admission. This is mind boggling hypocrisy.

[dogyks 16]

2 hours ago, kaiser said:

“Bukowski” The art how to live with idiots. It’s a challenge to live with those Americans that fly a swastika symbol and in support of a narcissist validating hatred in all those miserable Americans. 

If hijabs are okay, I can't really bitch about the odd Hakenkreuz.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Edited August 13 by dogyks

[JoeWeber 2,963]

2 hours ago, BIGUN said:

Very slippery slope.   

Yes. And be honest, would you refuse or salute and go?

[JerryBaumchen 1,471]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

Yes. And be honest, would you refuse or salute and go?

Hi Joe,

Ah, therein lies the question:  Dietrich Bonhoeffer - Wikipedia

Back in the '50's there was a lot of:  Better red than dead.

Jerry Baumchen

[BIGUN 1,497]

3 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

And be honest, would you refuse or salute and go?

I was regular Army, not National Guard. My job was outside the US borders.

[JoeWeber 2,963]

19 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

I was regular Army, not National Guard. My job was outside the US borders.

Regular Marines were sent to LA. I ask again, would you refuse or salute and go?

[gowlerk 2,281]

22 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

I was regular Army, not National Guard. My job was outside the US borders.

Are you a lawyer or a politician? I ask because you are so good at dodging questions. I'm pretty sure that the only real answer you could give is that you would indeed follow a lawful order. Why not just say so?

[Phil1111 1,189]

59 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

I was regular Army, not National Guard. My job was outside the US borders.

 

35 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Are you a lawyer or a politician? I ask because you are so good at dodging questions....

Thats usually associated with officers.

[BIGUN 1,497]

 

38 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I ask again, would you refuse or salute and go?

 It's a non-starter, Joe. The extreme end of tie-downs for a hypothetical situation. 

37 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I ask because you are so good at dodging questions.

Yeah, I tend to side-step argumentum ad absurdum

[JerryBaumchen 1,471]

3 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

 

Thats usually associated with officers.

Hi Phil,

Or, as First Sgt Milt Warden says:  'I hate officers.'

Jerry Baumchen

[JoeWeber 2,963]

56 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Are you a lawyer or a politician? I ask because you are so good at dodging questions. I'm pretty sure that the only real answer you could give is that you would indeed follow a lawful order. Why not just say so?

To do so would be to expose the fallacy. The phrase is "enemies, foreign and domestic". He knows full well that he would have, or had, no role in deciding who is whom and would have followed the orders he was sworn to follow. The sad reality is that our police and our military will be the tools used to destroy our democracy and the confused patriots in their ranks will be, as ever, just following orders.

[BIGUN 1,497]

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

To do so would be to expose the fallacy.

Cute. The loaded question is the fallacy. 

[JoeWeber 2,963]

5 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Cute. The loaded question is the fallacy. 

I wasn’t being cute and I’d enjoy, given your reluctance, reading anyone’s defense of your refusal to admit the truth: you would obey the orders because your training and oath demands it.

If the oath was limited to “foreign” your first reply might have been defensible. 

[BIGUN 1,497]

13 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I wasn’t being cute and I’d enjoy, given your reluctance, reading anyone’s defense of your refusal to admit the truth: you would obey the orders because your training and oath demands it.

If the oath was limited to “foreign” your first reply might have been defensible. 

You seem to think you've wrapped this package up with a nice little bow tie. Yet, you don't understand the oath beyond the words. Enemies Foreign and Domestic as it pertains to the Constitution. 

U.S. service members take that oath to uphold the Constitution. Under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the U.S. Manual for Courts-Martial, service members must obey lawful orders and disobey unlawful orders. Unlawful orders are those that clearly violate the U.S. Constitution, international human rights standards AND/OR the Geneva Conventions.

Service members who follow an illegal order can be held liable and court-martialed or be subject to prosecution by international tribunals. Following orders from a superior is no defense as we saw with Lt. Calley. 

Would I stand up against an unlawful order. I have. And, a three-star General was relieved not just of his rank, but his service.

You forgot to use the entire oath - check up on it. And, then when you ask if the President gave me an illegal order; I can with utmost confidence tell you; I would tell him to go fuck himself. So, quit trying to use me to cast your limelight.