Reply With Quote
We'd end up paying for it
, the factories built here in the states get ridiculous tax breaks.
It'd probably be more feasible to just increase taxes on American companies that import from their Mexico factories.
We'd end up paying for it
If he runs it like his business, does that mean he is going to use the IRS to help launder money for mobsters? That is pretty much his business model in a nuts .
Further he is running it like thinly staffed family business. It is too big, and he is in over his head. Companies fail a LOT when forced to grow, because the strategies and personnel that worked fine for a small business are NOT what is needed in a large business.
Lastly, this guy is an idiot, with bankruptcies, and a string of unpaid contractors. That doesn't fly for the government.
I am all for trying things, but not at the cost of corruption and incompetence. This guy got away with being incompetent, because he was crooked as and willing to look the other way as long as someone cuts him a check.
Not quite a business model I want for my government either.
Back on topic............Stormy is just trying to get paid. This has nothing to do with Trumps presidency. He is just a womanizing s bag, and this is between his wife and him. , he has to deal with how Melania is going to take knowing her husband was banging everything in sight while they were married. Hittin pornstars and who knows who else without protection. She may want to mix in STD testing soon.
I'd guess that she knew all of that going in and already accepted it...
Taxes. 21%(new Corp rate) < 30% (Mexico corporate rate)
More than likely, because he probably approached her the same way he did all the other women. She knew.
Just like Weinstein, Trump has some well oiled machinery in place to "catch and kill" the stories of Trump's ing around.
Problem is, when you do this involving a poltical campaign, there are laws about "in kind" donations.
Looks like some lawyers is gonna get in trouble for collusion to break the law.
Read more at https://wonkette.com/631505/legal-fu...u4iyHdWuEm1.99Is it WRONG to pretend to be negotiating a settlement on your client’s behalf when you’re actually trying to get her story to a third party? IT IS. So Keith Davidson better hope this part of the complaint is not accurate!...
But, hey lookie here! Last month, the New York Times reported that immediately after persuading McDougal to sign, Davidson called up Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen to tell him the deal was done.
O RLY? What the did Donald Trump’s personal lawyer have to do with this case? Unless he was a silent party to the negotiations the whole time on behalf of Trump and the campaign. Oh, gosh what is the word for that?
Oh, right. COLLUSION. Or in boring lawtalk, conspiracy to violate campaign finance law. These lawsuits are going to be bonkers insane!
---------------------------------------------------------
We are going to see a sitting President have to testify under oath about ing someone NOT the first lady. Multiple women NOT the first lady.
From the sounds of the machinery in place to "catch and kill" all the lawsuits about sex, and assault, it seems he is running like this guys business:
Read more at https://wonkette.com/631489/how-much...M7sHFzEo0Ia.99Like Daniels, McDougal hired attorney Keith Davidson to negotiate her settlement. Only according to the complaint, Davidson was actually “working closely with representatives for Mr. Trump while pretending to advocate on her behalf.” WHOA IF TRUE! And right after McDougal finally relented to Davidson’s (alleged) pressure to sign the AMI paperwork in August 2016, despite her protestation that she didn’t understand it and needed time to think, Davidson called up Michael Cohen to tell him the deal was done.
For all these lawsuits, the President is trying to claim he can't be sued.
Clinton v. Jones settled that .
So here is where we get to listen to someone (erp) talk about sexy time with Trump:
Read more at https://wonkette.com/631489/how-much...M7sHFzEo0Ia.99
Labor costs?
Labor costs in Mexico are definitely a lot lower, but when you start factoring in lower production output per person (sometimes only 30% of what a US worker would produce in some fields) and increased Gov't compliance costs (e-invoicing/e-accounting mandatory in Mexico), the scales start tipping the other way when the effective tax rate is 12% lower. Add in the fact that the corporation is actually able to use the money in the US instead of it just sitting there abroad, and it looks even better.
Not everyone's supply chain will be the same, but if someone that has moved production to Mexico can now save a couple percent, they'll be shifting stuff back to the US. It's all about the $$.
You think a business won't shift production to save money?
I'm laughing at the prospect that you think those production jobs can possibly shift to the US at all.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/artic...p-s-tough-talk
https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...-manufacturing
https://www.wvnews.com/w-va-seeing-u...d3e2f057e.html
Let's get back to porn stars, strippers, and Playboy bunnies
You guys don't seem to realize that Trumps tariffs if enacted will probably be limited to steel and aluminum. He can get away with doing it without congress by claiming its a national security issue. (Tanks and planes ya know) He cant just arbitrarily start slapping tariffs on everything because on non security stuff has to get a 2/3 in the senate.
Speaking of things that Trump has gotten away with:
The only thing Crooked Donald Trump is good at in business is looking the other way when someone hands him a check.
Whatever the provocation—reported payoffs to a porn star, a chaotic security-clearance process in the White House, the public belittling of Attorney General Jeff Sessions—congressional Republicans have found ways to excuse or simply ignore behavior that would have launched a thousand subpoenas under a Democratic president.
With all of this, the GOP leadership is sending an unmistakable signal to voters antagonistic or ambivalent about Trump: So long as Republicans hold the congressional majority, they will not act to meaningfully constrain, or even oversee, the president. That choice represents an epic gamble for November—and beyond.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...idterms/556166
Congressional Repugs shot fulfilled their raison d'etre, shot their wad, with the tax cut for their paymaster of the oligarchy.
For the Repugs, Trash is nothing but a distracting freak show,
importantly guaranteed to veto nothing the Repugs pass,
while the Repugs and Trash's cabinet America deeper into un ability.
Stormy Daniels’ lawyer hints that “60 Minutes” interview will uncover serious dirt on Trump
“I think they’re going to learn quite a bit,” Daniels’ lawyer told CNN’s Chris Cuomo
“If Stormy Daniels is free to say whatever she wants to say, what do the American people stand to learn here?” Cuomo asked Avenatti.
“I think they’re going to learn quite a bit,”Avenatti said.
“There are two aspects to this,
there’s the act — meaning the relationship with Mr. Trump — and
there’s the cover, and
I think she’s going to touch on both of those during the ["60 Minutes"] interview.”
“I think this is about engaging in thuggish behavior, threats, intimidation, and hiding the money trail,”
Avenatti said to Cuomo.
“I think ultimately, Chris, that’s what this is going to get to.
And ultimately, we’re going to make sure that the facts are known to the American people.
Individuals that are far more powerful than me, far more powerful than my client,
they will ultimately determine whether those facts lead to something else."
As Avenatti said,
Clifford's grievances over the hush agreement are not related to her alleged affair,
but to the way in which Trump silenced Clifford.
Avenatti and Clifford claim that Clifford recently suffered threats of physical violence over the ordeal.
https://www.salon.com/2018/03/22/sto...dirt-on-trump/
CNN panel of women creeped out by ex-Playmate’s claim that Trump compared her to Ivanka during sex
an all-female panel sitting down with CNN host Don Lemon was visibly repulsed after watching a clip of an ex-Playboy Playmate claiming that President Donald Trump told her she reminded him of his daughter Ivanka during one of their alleged sexual trysts.
In an exclusive interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Karen McDougal described her 15-month-long relationship with the then-New York developer, saying that Trump complimented her and compared her to his oldest daughter.
“You know, he is very proud of Ivanka, as he should be,” McDougal recalled for the CNN host.
“She is a brilliant woman, she is beautiful. She is, you know, that’s his daughter and he should be proud of her.
He said, I was beautiful like her and, you know ‘you’re a smart girl.’ There wasn’t a lot of comparing but there was some, yeah.”
“This is so creepy,” Setmayer began.
“Can we remind people what he said about his daughter? That he made comments about her on Howard Stern, disgustingly sexual in nature.
Talking about her chest size, about how she is a 10. That’s creepy.”
“Didn’t he say on The View, ‘I would be dating my daughter?” Lemon prompted.
“Yes, he said that,” Setmayer excitedly agreed.
“If she wasn’t his daughter he would date her.
I don’t know any father that talks like that, even if their daughters were supermodels.
It’s creepy and disgusting.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/watch-cnn-panel-women-creeped-ex-playmates-claim-trump-compared-ivanka-sex/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaig n=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story%29
Old news, but always fun to hear about y'all's cult hero sicko Trash!
Last edited by boutons_deux; 03-23-2018 at 01:36 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
