Remove this Banner Ad

NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 4

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

faible said:
We apply a >10% tariff to all US imports?
Click to expand...
Trump's numbers are largely made up. The "300% Canadian dairy tariff" has never been applied due to the extraordinary benchmarks that would have to be met first.

Trump just lies to justify silly decisions.
 
Mofra said:
Trump's numbers are largely made up. The "300% Canadian dairy tariff" has never been applied due to the extraordinary benchmarks that would have to be met first.

Trump just lies to justify silly decisions.
Click to expand...

Saw a twitter post floating around where they think they've just taken the size of the deficit, and used that as the tariff amount.

Where there's no deficit, or it's even, they've applied 10%.

For example in Australia, where we import more from the US than we export to the US.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

bourbons said:
Eh? There's no "if it turns out" mate, it's happened :drunk:
Click to expand...

"We're done with the mockery". Yeah, right.

You're entitled to your beliefs mate. You also believed Ratcliffe lied about Goldberg claiming he'd released the name of a CIA operative in the chat. You also original believed the chats contained war plans, then changed that to 'attack plans', and now you're stuck on them containing classified intel. The next step will be coming to the realisation they contained sensitive info, but not classified info.

Hegseth, Gabbard and Ratcliffe have said they contained no classified info. Gabbard and Ratcliffe have done so in front of a committee that can hold them liable for perjury. They wouldn't have done that if they weren't on solid ground. You might also consider that the DOD and DNI have different definitions on what relates to classified information and Hegseth has the authority to classify and declassify information. I don't know exactly why they can all claim there wasn't classified info in the chats and I don't really care. They have done so, and I believe they wouldn't have if they didn't have a firm basis to make that claim. So that's my stance and I don't think I need to keep repeating myself ad infinitum or change my stance unless some new information justifies me doing so.
 
FlowersByIrene said:
Sure. But I do love the fact that the US Tariffs are lower in almost every single scenario than the tariffs imposed in reverse against the US and it's "AN ECONOMIC DISASTER"
Click to expand...
The "currency manipulation and trade barriers" includes things like biosecurity measures. That's probably why Norfolk island ended up with 29%, because they put greater restrictions on bringing in live animals, etc.
 
EasternTiger said:
Albanese couldn’t negotiate us out of the tariff storm.

What a chump.

The timing sucks for him, what with Straya heading to a federal election and all.

Oh well.
Click to expand...
You don't negotiate with Trump.

He dictates and you do what he wants. Which in this case, is to change all the parts of the US trade deal that favours us, but none of it that favours them.

Or, he dictates and you ignore him.

Option 2 is the only viable option and it's the one he took.

It's the one Dutton would have taken too.

Any voter that doesn't know this has half a brain and was voting Dutton anyway, so I don't think it hurts Albo.

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
FlowersByIrene said:
Sure. But I do love the fact that the US Tariffs are lower in almost every single scenario than the tariffs imposed in reverse against the US and it's "AN ECONOMIC DISASTER"
Click to expand...
Like how they scream about high tariffs from Canada, and ignore things like dairy have exemption limits negotiated into the trade deal, which means those tariffs have never been imposed?


On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
jatz14 said:
You don't negotiate with Trump.

He dictates and you do what he wants. Which in this case, is to change all the parts of the US trade deal that favours us, but none of it that favours them.

Or, he dictates and you ignore him.

Option 2 is the only viable option and it's the one he took.

It's the one Dutton would have taken too.

Any voter that doesn't know this has half a brain and was voting Dutton anyway, so I don't think it hurts Albo.

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

It's also a global thing, I don't think it's a needle mover. Dutton (or One Nation / Trumpet of Patriot) type voters will make a big fuss of it though.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
"We're done with the mockery". Yeah, right.
Click to expand...
Yes, we were. The emoji is an expression of disbelief that anyone could look at those confirmed facts and still believe Gabbard and Ratcliffe didn't lie about there being no classified info.

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
You also believed Ratcliffe lied about Goldberg claiming he'd released the name of a CIA operative in the chat.
Click to expand...
You already attempted this one mate, and its the actual point I'm making - when presented with unassailable, ironclad evidence that my belief was wrong, my belief changed. When you were presented with such evidence, you chose to go "hmm nah my belief is still that its not classified".

Thats the difference between how you and I post, its why you've gotten mocked previously and why I'm now pretty sure I'll be mocking you again in future. Is that not a completely reasonable response for someone so obviously operating in bad faith?

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
You also original believed the chats contained war plans, then changed that to 'attack plans', and now you're stuck on them containing classified intel. The next step will be coming to the realisation they contained sensitive info, but not classified info.
Click to expand...
War/attack/military/strike plans, call them whatever you like mate, with the inclusion of strike timings thats what they were.

And I'm not stuck on it being classified info, official DNI policy is ¯\(ツ)/¯

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Hegseth, Gabbard and Ratcliffe have said they contained no classified info.
Click to expand...
Yes, and they clearly lied by doing so.

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
Gabbard and Ratcliffe have done so in front of a committee that can hold them liable for perjury. They wouldn't have done that if they weren't on solid ground.
Click to expand...
They are on solid ground despite lying, but that's because they're loyalist lickspittle Trump appointees that he won't fire (well, until they've ****ed up a few more times anyway lol). Lying is what Trump explicitly wants from them.

And no, the Republican controlled Senate Intelligience Committee won't be charging them with perjury lol. Perjury doesn't seem to be a thing in any government hearings these day in any case, as stated 3 current SC judges straight up lied on RvW in their confirmation hearings.

HitTheNailOnTheHead said:
You might also consider that the DOD and DNI have different definitions on what relates to classified information and Hegseth has the authority to classify and declassify information. I don't know exactly why they can all claim there wasn't classified info in the chats and I don't really care. They have done so, and I believe they wouldn't have if they didn't have a firm basis to make that claim. So that's my stance and I don't think I need to keep repeating myself ad infinitum or change my stance unless some new information justifies me doing so.
Click to expand...
Yes, he has the authority - but he didn't use it in this case, coz no one is going to expressly declassify the timings of future military strikes, even Hegseth. Its ludicrous on the face of it (this is the "did you know that water isn't wet" shitck I used earlier).

You're pissing down my back and telling me its raining mate, thats all thats happening here. If you honestly don't know that, you're so far gone in terms of ability to actually assess information its ridiculous, your partisan leaning and instant automatic reflex to defend your 'side' has actually cancelled your ability to think and connect one simple data point to the next :oops:

But I think you do actually realise that, but just won't admit it. I'm honestly sorry mate, I tried. But you're now seriously stating that you don't think Trump and his appointees would say something "if they didn't have a firm basis to make that claim" :drunk:

Thats just next level cooked, and deserves nothing but mockery :(
 
bourbons said:
Yes, we were.
Click to expand...

Cut the pretense. The very first post after you made the unprompted gesture of dispensing with mockery (a position I then immediately adopted and haven't yet resiled from) was full of mockery in its last paragraph.


It's like a drug mate. You can't stop doing something which you've habitually done for years. It's the crutch you keep returning to because you mistakenly believe it makes your arguments appear more effective.

I note that you completely avoided responding to my point about there being differences in the DNI and DOD definitions BTW.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Jeffrey Goldberg. I couldn't work out if this was genuine or not for 5 days. Also JG, this was top secret, immediately identifiable war plans, attack plans, classified info. The Houthis would have been able to immediately determine this was real and not a simulation/war games and rendered the incoming 2 week bombing campaign ineffective . 🥃 🥃 🥃 🤣
 

Remove this Banner Ad

NWO/Illuminati US politics - Pt 4


Write your reply...

Similar threads

HitTheNailOnTheHead
Conspiracy Theory You have more chance of winning US lotto than drowning and yet the Obama and the Clinton chefs have both apparently drowned. What is going on?
Replies
12
Views
1K
LuvtheKangas
LuvtheKangas

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top