It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Donald Trump and George Soros: The Plot Thickens

page: 2
24
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 05:43 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

hey, im usually one of those useful Trump idiots. But now you got my attention. Anytime we have to ask why, something is off. Well, hopefully there will be more insight into this. Need to see where it leads.

Look at that, found that 1 in ten that had to be listening. I like finding answers to why.




posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 08:11 AM
link   
When your a billionaire making big deals, your going to deal with other billionaires in the process. That is just business. I hate Microsoft, but I am sure if I made it huge in the computer industry, I would cross paths with them eventually. Just how it is.

Now show me something where Trump has the same leftist plans and motives as Soros and then I would be worried.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 08:21 AM
link   
Soros has connections to both Trump and Hillary, google it.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

If Trump didn't have cash in hand, could they have taken shares in other of his companies? From what I know [ and I am NOT a businessman ] this is done sometimes, when paying out that much cash, could bankrupt the very company they were trying to start.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: iTruthSeeker
When your a billionaire making big deals, your going to deal with other billionaires in the process. That is just business. I hate Microsoft, but I am sure if I made it huge in the computer industry, I would cross paths with them eventually. Just how it is.

Now show me something where Trump has the same leftist plans and motives as Soros and then I would be worried.


Ah, the "good business," excuse.

By your logic, Soros is just doing what anyone else in his position would do. As well as Hillary Clinton.

Also - burden of proof is on you, no one else. You don't get to make a claim for someone else to disprove. That's now how it works, and is called a logical fallacy.

Amazing, though, and how quickly this is dismissed by the diehard cult following.

You guys bemoaned and whined about the Illuminutty George Soros taking over America and to be afraid - be very afraid - but all you have to say to this is "it's what happens in business,"?

Just furthers the point that Trump supporters vote based on blind-partisan obsession.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Very interesting!

Now, wait a minute, are you suggesting that Soros is a bad guy?!?!?


This!

Waiting for the day the leftest admit that.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Sure. Wtf cares about George Soros? I'm personally thankful that he's a very old man who probably won't be around to be the go to boogeyman for much longer. The wait is over:

George Soros is a bad guy.

He also sees himself a being a messiah of some sort which is pretty damn disturbing. I'll throw in a bonus for you: Hillary Clinton is "a bad woman."

Now how many of you Trumpeteers are going to admit that Donald Trump is "a bad guy?"
edit on 2016-9-10 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: infolurker

Sure. Wtf cares about George Soros? I'm personally thankful that he's a very old man who probably won't be around to be the go to boogeyman for much longer. The wait is over:

George Soros is a bad guy.

He also seems himself a being a messiah of some sort which is pretty damn disturbing. I'll throw in a bonus for you: Hillary Clinton is "a bad woman."

Now how many of you Trumpeteers are going to admit that Donald Trump is "a bad guy?"


Oh, I dislike Trump. He is about that last person out of the pack I would back.

I think he has way too many Progressive Authoritarian tendencies and have very little trust for him. That being said, Hillary is a Progressive Authoritarian and has a record of vileness. So for me, It is "What Trump Might Do" vs. "What We Know Clinton Will Do".

Think about it, The Establishment of both parties are against Trump. This so marginalizes and limits him unlike Clinton who espouses "corruption and a piece of the loot for all of the thieves". The establishment will block Trump on any wild schemes, they will actively participate with Clinton's as long as they get something out of it.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

What do you "know Clinton will do"?

Just for instance.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian



Why the hell would a trio including George Soros and Trump buddy/advisor Steve Feinberg let go of $130 million in debt for a mere $48 million?


For the same reason a bank let's go of a $50k debt for $15k. They sell the debt, recover what they can through the sale and write off the balance on their books.

This is a non-issue and standard business practice for lenders.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: infolurker

What do you "know Clinton will do"?

Just for instance.


Really?

OK.

TPP, she will pass it (she was for it before she was against it and will be for it again after the election).

Extended firearm restrictions, gun control. (Remember: The Heller Decision was 5-4, 1 more and we loose our rights)

Appointment of up to 300 judges, including one or more Supreme Court justices. Democrats have a history of appointing "activist" judges. This reason alone is enough for me to vote against her.

After ObamaCare fails in the next couple of years, she has already stated she wants to press for a public option for the serfs but again, congress and the government employees will be "exempted" because it will be terrible but good enough for the commoners.

She supports the Carbon Credit Scam (hell why wouldn't she, it is a huge financial scam and I am sure they want a share of those proceeds)


Vote Smart, Vote Gridlock.


edit on 10-9-2016 by infolurker because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-9-2016 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Thanks for your honesty ... I'll respond in kind.

ANd here I thought Congress had to "pass" trade agreements ... what about that.

Yep. Obama was going to take all the guns away too. Standard right-wing paranoia.

Yep, the President does get to appoint Judges and Justices. That's the way the Constitution sets it up. Congress is supposed to either confirm or deny those appointments, not sit on their asses and do nothing. Although I get this one ... the idea of Trump appointing Supreme Court Justices is utterly terrifying to me.

ObamaCare isn't going to fail ... you guys have been harping on that for six years. Republicans were going to repeal or replace it ... and what do we have? Nothing. Crickets. Tumbleweeds. And plenty of politically motivated investigations, abusing their Constitutional power.

Single payer? Public option? Oh, you mean like most of the Western world has had for decades? Kewl.

And, in the category of "light at the end of the tunnel" ... we actually agree on the obnoxious idea of "Carbon Credits" ... ultimate scam.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: infolurker

Thanks for your honesty ... I'll respond in kind.

ANd here I thought Congress had to "pass" trade agreements ... what about that.

Yep. Obama was going to take all the guns away too. Standard right-wing paranoia.

Yep, the President does get to appoint Judges and Justices. That's the way the Constitution sets it up. Congress is supposed to either confirm or deny those appointments, not sit on their asses and do nothing. Although I get this one ... the idea of Trump appointing Supreme Court Justices is utterly terrifying to me.

ObamaCare isn't going to fail ... you guys have been harping on that for six years. Republicans were going to repeal or replace it ... and what do we have? Nothing. Crickets. Tumbleweeds. And plenty of politically motivated investigations, abusing their Constitutional power.

Single payer? Public option? Oh, you mean like most of the Western world has had for decades? Kewl.

And, in the category of "light at the end of the tunnel" ... we actually agree on the obnoxious idea of "Carbon Credits" ... ultimate scam.



Now, I am a big opposer to "public option" simply because like anything else in Government, Lobbyist will actually write the damn bill to favor the "special interests" at the cost of the citizens.

So, we have 3 primary systems that have been in place in recent years. Private Insurance Companies setting the rules and rates, medicade/medicare payouts, and now Obama Care which is a hybrid.

None of these address costs because healthcare conglomerates can charge whatever they want for their goods and services, including variable pricing depending on the recipients coverage, and no laws requiring "posted pricing".

So, here is my "big government" way to fix healthcare.... (very high level)

Implement common codes for every non-emergency healthcare procedure, diagnostic tests and services. Instead of some inefficient public option we provide Healthcare Debit Cards... yes, Special Debit cards that can only be used for authorized medical procedures.

You want to see a Doctor, you get on your computer or Iphone and choose which one you want by how much they charge, ratings, etc. See all available Doctors, Clinics, or walk in care centers within X radius of zipcode xxxxx by lowest price, go.

Similarly, If a Doctor orders tests, imaging, etc. They are required to hand you a form with the specific test codes. Then you can search again and actually choose based on price, ratings, or other sorting options. In this way, healthcare facilities actually have to compete for your business and it puts choice back into your hands. Prices will drop and quality will improve. (See Lazik Surgery for example, prices continue to drop and quality / technology constantly improve because it is not subsidized by insurance)

Any 3/4 of any unused funds carry over every year with 1/4 being given to you as cash at tax time. (incentive not to use it frivolously and prevent fraud).



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

I don't disagree about lobbyists writing most bills.

You are absolutely correct in that the ACA was a mixed bag. One of the reasons is that it incorporated many of the standard (up until the passage of ACA) characteristics of a Republican healthcare program ... State exchanges, individual mandate, etc. Had the Democrats not been duped into trying to compromise, it's possible we might have had a better law.

The real issue I have is that it seems to me that individual health care should be considered as much a part of the national infrastructure as highways, power-grids, navigable waterways, communication systems, domestic (internal) and international (borders and international interests) security. I do know that it must remain in some ways a mixed system (partially capitalistic and partially socialistic) because while I'd like to think that we'd continue to develop better systems for health because of altruism, it's pretty much a fact that potential profit drives R&D.

You're absolutely right that one of the great failures of the ACA is that there was no attempt to control healthcare costs. That was my first comment about it, and when I knew we, the People, had been screwed over once again in many ways.

Your suggestion is as valid as any I've seen; whatever we do, we need to stop being stupid about it.

I'm sure we can both agree on that point.



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Good post. S+F.



This is more along the lines of what a proper conspiracy theory post should look like — not the insubstantial, superficial garbage


Here is the book written by Edward Bernays, "Propaganda" in 1928. This is more along the lines of what a proper conspiracy IS...

www.historyisaweapon.org...


All potential candidates, high ranking politicians, and heads of state, have ties (are puppets) to the financial elite, especially in America. The oligarchy of banks, corporations, industrialized institutions, and aristocratic society have come together to form a plutocracy that dictates domestic and foriegn policies through major think tanks such as 'The Brookings Institute' and 'Council On Foreign Relations' along with controlling global trade of world resources both legal and illegal - they control the U.N, NATO, military industrial complex, intelligence agencies, transnational corporations, media, technology and weapons manufacturing. It has been this way before WWII.

The above is nothing new under the sun for ATS members and neither what is being suggested in the OP. JFK's famous speech on how the U.S government has been high jacked by oligarchs was telling us the same thing.


[The] American business community was also very impressed with the propaganda effort. They had a problem at that time. The country was becoming formally more democratic. A lot more people were able to vote and that sort of thing. The country was becoming wealthier and more people could participate and a lot of new immigrants were coming in, and so on.

So what do you do? It's going to be harder to run things as a private club. Therefore, obviously, you have to control what people think. There had been public relation specialists but there was never a public relations industry. There was a guy hired to make Rockefeller's image look prettier and that sort of thing. But this huge public relations industry, which is a U.S. invention and a monstrous industry, came out of the first World War. The leading figures were people in the Creel Commission. In fact, the main one, Edward Bernays, comes right out of the Creel Commission. He has a book that came out right afterwards called Propaganda. The term "propaganda," incidentally, did not have negative connotations in those days. It was during the second World War that the term became taboo because it was connected with Germany, and all those bad things. But in this period, the term propaganda just meant information or something like that. So he wrote a book called Propaganda around 1925, and it starts off by saying he is applying the lessons of the first World War. The propaganda system of the first World War and this commission that he was part of showed, he says, it is possible to "regiment the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments their bodies." These new techniques of regimentation of minds, he said, had to be used by the intelligent minorities in order to make sure that the slobs stay on the right course. We can do it now because we have these new techniques.

This is the main manual of the public relations industry. Bernays is kind of the guru. He was an authentic Roosevelt/Kennedy liberal. He also engineered the public relations effort behind the U.S.-backed coup which overthrew the democratic government of Guatemala.

His major coup, the one that really propelled him into fame in the late 1920s, was getting women to smoke. Women didn't smoke in those days and he ran huge campaigns for Chesterfield. You know all the techniques—models and movie stars with cigarettes coming out of their mouths and that kind of thing. He got enormous praise for that. So he became a leading figure of the industry, and his book was the real manual.

—Noam Chomsky

(From Chomsky's "What Makes Mainstream Media
Mainstream": a talk at Z Media Institute, June 1997)


So, Donald Trump and George Soros having ties is not surprising. I believe Trump was put in the position he is in simply to escort Clinton into the White House. Assuming votes aren't rigged, if Trump wins, then all remains good for those pulling the strings. The plot hasn't thickened at all, it has been stewing for over one hundred years...


edit on 10-9-2016 by Involutionist because: Grammar and punctuation SUCKS!



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   
So, some rich people make some business deals. Is there anything illegal here? I understand you are trying to tie Soros to Trump but to show what? Soros is notorious for the long shot deal. Betting for collapse and writing it off and taking it all.

What is the point of the thread anti? No need for the insults but really, what are you trying to do other than repackage a MSM hit piece that a person making 10 bucks an hour could care less about.

BTW- It would be nice to wager billions and just chill out, would it not?



posted on Sep, 10 2016 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
So, some rich people make some business deals. Is there anything illegal here? I understand you are trying to tie Soros to Trump but to show what? Soros is notorious for the long shot deal. Betting for collapse and writing it off and taking it all.

What is the point of the thread anti? No need for the insults but really, what are you trying to do other than repackage a MSM hit piece that a person making 10 bucks an hour could care less about.

BTW- It would be nice to wager billions and just chill out, would it not?


Wait a minute now. For at least the last eight years we've been hearing that George Soros is one of the roots of all evil in the world.

Now you're writing that off to "some rich people making deals together?"

IN every previous thread, connection to Soros was "proof" of nefarious activity ... just not when it comes to Trump???

Come on Matafuchs; I know he's your guy but COME ON!



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 01:01 AM
link   
a reply to: bobs_uruncle



For the same reason a bank let's go of a $50k debt for $15k.

They sell the debt, recover what they can through the sale and write off the balance on their books. This is a non-issue and standard business practice for lenders.


Bulls#.

Why would they write off debt when the loan wasn't in default, the building was ostensibly doing well (at 70% occupancy or so counting units under contract), etc? That doesn't wash. Bad debt is written off when it's not recoverable so that it be can be taken as an expense, reducing tax liability. If nothing else, the IRS is going to want some explanation.

Furthermore, this was a mezzanine loan. With mezzanine financing, if he defaulted, they would have assumed some percent of ownership or equity interest.

You're going to have to try a whole helluva lot harder than that.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 02:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

They didn't write off debt you have no clue how a mezzanine loan works that's all. It can be used as a line if credit for business expansion. It's got some huge advantages to a business it's intrest is tax deductible and keeps cash on hand if needed . Now because a company can get thr money doesn't mean they have to the loan can set there you get a tax deduction on the coupons and best if all it shows up as equity to investors.

Here's what you guys don't know to even judge ehat happened with the loan. Was any of the equity actually used or did he just pay the coupons ? How much if the debt was converted into stocks along the way?? What was the original term for stock options ?? TO PUT IT BLUNTLY YOU CAN'T ACCESS THE DEAL UNTIL YOU SEE THE TERMS. Meaning this is nothin but wild speculation with we don't even know the amount of a mezzanine loan that was used If any. Trump could very easily just locked it up in company equity.



posted on Sep, 11 2016 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

Hardly reported at all was Stephen Moore's speech in front of the CNP. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that most people have no idea who the CNP or that Bush 43's 1999 speech to the CNP and subsequent ring kissing is likely what solidified his nomination as the GOP candidate.

Stephen Moore was quite obviously sent to the CNP to convey the broad strokes of Trump's economic plan to reassure the kingmakers and power brokers. The plan btw is to try to shutdown the Dept of Energy, the Dept of Commerce, Dept of Education, eliminate TANF and then remove all regulations and restrictions on mining and drilling.
.....
None of that makes any sense at all but it appears to be some blend of libertarianesque religious faith in free market voodoo and supply-side economics. In other words, even if it's utter nonsense, it plays well with certain crusty halfwits who meet in secret clubs.


Yes. The fantasy belief that one day everyone will hold hands and sing kumbaya sits on the dreamers' shelf with the fantasy Libertarian belief in unregulated capitalism and supply-side economics.

Stephen Moore is a disciple of this Koch-inspired fantasy. The downward slippery slope started in earnest with the Reagan election in 1980, with the GOP falsely proclaiming that it was a mandate for "less government". No one at the time, and so few since, loudly translated that correctly as "undoing the programs of the New Deal and the Great Society" and every program since then.

Kind of like Trump preferring that Putin called him "brilliant" rather than "colorful", the GOP-speak was mistranslated in the minds of newly acquired Reagan voters (the "little people", the Have-less non-members of the country club GOP elite) as doing away with programs that benefited "minorities". In the ensuing years, the Have-less (99%) would all go into debt to keep up their lifestyle as their wealth was vacuumed up by the 1% .

This fantasy ideology (combined with theocon religious beliefs in Biblical based capitalism) has taken over the GOP, but even Moore won't tell the rest of the story, that it is not just doing away with a few unwelcome departments, but rather it is destruction of the federal govt as it now stands. Americans would be "freed" from their govt! As Grover Norquist has been saying for years about "drowning govt in a bathtub".

The 99% have been easily manipulated (brainwashed) into believing that "privatization" and no govt regulations are good for them, by framing it as best for the individual, whereas it really is in the best interest of the billionaire class. Look up the burning of the Cuyahoga River to see what an unregulated nation looks like, going up in flames.

Trump is all in with the GOP now. He is the unwitting tool of the fantasy dreamers and schemers, the fool sent by the billionaire GOP elite to entertain their members, all in the name of gathering votes which will allow them to claim, as they did for Reagan, that there is a mandate to destroy the govt. To get govt off the backs of the poor billionaires.




top topics



 
24
<< 1   >>

log in

join