Probably not, actually. Even Trump's no longer making that claim. Listen to your hero for once - it played well during the election, but now you have to accept that it's a load of bull.
Highly questionable. At least *some* of the claims that Trump's committed sexual assault are pretty credible. Even if you don't believe the women, Trump himself has said it. Are you saying that he was LYING to Billy Bush? That your hero spouts untruths? (That's without going into a BUNCH of other ethically and legally dubious activities carried on by Trump, his charities, and various of his businesses.)
Yeah, probably.
Sort of true. When you actually ELECT the big money interests, it's kind of true to say that they can't be bought by themselves. The guy *has* his own corporate interests to look out for, and he's made no qualms about doing so.
That, too, is dubious. MOST of his stated networth is based on his own valuation of his 'name' - which, admittedly, varies based on his mood. You can't sell a name. You can't liquidate a name to pay off creditors - a fact he counts on, because while he's saying that he's worth many billions in the hopes that people will lend him money, his main 'asset' can't be collected upon.
Even in terms of his actual assets, though, there's reason to be highly doubtful. The nature of his business practices suggests constant cash flow issues - he pulls the "I can't afford to pay my contractors, so you'll have to take pennies on the dollar" card VERY frequently, even outside of the actual bankruptcies. And the failure and refusal to release his income tax returns, despite promising the year before starting his run that he would, suggests something to hide. Given that he *continued* to hide his tax returns even after one big secret - the guy pays less tax than you or I - was revealed, one can infer that whatever he was hiding is still hidden. One of the strong possibilities here is that he's actually not rich at all, but that his whole empire is a heavily leveraged house of cards.





Reply With Quote