Total snip
TLDR - Over 1,000 words of pure shit from you - you empty gasbag!
JJG, You are a laughingstock!
Sorry (not sorry) that your little head has too many difficulties understanding bitcoin-related matters - including ideas that involve potentially managing our own bitcoin with anticipations in regards to whether we had accumulated enough bitcoin to carry out a withdrawal amount that would be sustainable.
O.k. So you (BitHolders) seem to believe that Trump is more of a speaker of truth than he is a liar.. and so hopefully you realize that he will come out with several justifications for whatever thing he is doing, to the extent that he even talks about it, and then at some point he will figure out which version has better reviews for him, and then he will stick with that version. There were a few shifting narratives with the Venezuela situation, including the oil justification, which he may or may not end up sticking with that version of events.
Surely any of us could agree that Trump will sometimes say some unpopular things and even sometimes be shown to have had been correct on some of the things that he had ended up saying, yet even if he is sometimes found to have been more correct than originally thought, I doubt that it means that he is either a purveyor of truth or even that he is trustworthy, even though there are a lot of folks (including yourself) who seem to be ready and willing to give him the benefit of the doubt in regards to all kinds of outrageous shit that he does to arguably push the limits of the powers (or to strive to increase the powers?) of the Presidency.
I would not necessarily put it like that and to conclude that I would have to listen to everything he says and posts to be able to make a proper comparison as to the percentage of truthfulness. It is possible that he is lying more often than he is telling the truth, I do not know this for sure because I do not follow it in detail and follow only the big events and statements. It is not a good use of time to read that much politics for us I think? However he is much more direct, avoids useless political speak and inventing complete bullshit justifications and false reasoning that most politicians use in the Western world. That is not really something that can be dispute, it is also why he gets often in trouble because he does it too much at times.
I have a hard time trying to justify his narcissistic and shock value practices, even though admittedly his tactics have rubbed off into several sectors of human and/or political interactions, and sure, maybe there was some value in breaking up some of the phoney aspects around social justice warrior talking points.
As far as pushing powers of the presidency, if you weren't concerned with previous presidents and democrats doing it then that would indicate an anti-Trump bias. There were ridiculous abuses, including the drone-murdering Obama who got a Nobel piece prize.
Obama was so loved that he got the Nobel Peace Prize before he even did anything. It was at the beginning of his term and supposedly a preemptive strike from the Nobel Peace prize committee.
There are degrees of breaking institutions - and even there are kinds of breaks in institutions. Of course, a certain level of spoils and history writing goes to the victor, yet I am not going to merely accept that "everybody does it" as an excuse.
Sure, I have a certain amount of anti-Trump bias. The guy wears on people, which he has been doing since 2016, and perhaps in some ways, worse starting in this current term, even though he was making some pro-bitcoin statements and appointing pro-bitcoin members of his cabinet, which might help him from my point of view in some ways in terms of the bitcoin topic..
The world is a joke, don't believe the official words, labels, rewards, and whatever. Truth does not win, connections and narrative wins.
There have always been all kinds of differing cultures around the world and differing power dynamics, and even confusion and misinformation to the extent that any of us want to (or need to) learn world politics.
He has likely never really been held accountable for his various bad man conduct, and surely some folks don't mind Trump because they think that he is their asshole. (meaning that he is an asshole, but at least he is on the same side as they are. They may or may not be correct in such assessment). Trump seems to be able to get along with many folks, as long as such folks are in agreement with Trump and don't waiver in agreeing with Trump.
Yes and what about this, do you think that most people get held accountable for their bad conduct?
It is good to be held accountable when a person engages in bad conduct.
It is just a reflection of society as a whole, on a higher level. Many people shield their own family members who are shady, commit petty crimes or even sometimes very violent crimes including murder. It doesn't even have to be crimes, they often protect them for their bad behavior and ethics. Accountability does not come from top down, it will come from the bottom up. Did the Bidens or Clintons get held accountable for anything serious...?
You are back to "what about-ism" arguments. For sure leaders should be held accountable to the extent that they might do bad things, and there are family and community issues and injustices all over the world... which ends up being a so what. I doubt that Trump is being held to any different standard or more strict standard, and I stand by my overall assertion that likely throughout his life he has not been a very good person since he likely has had and carries out a gangster and thug kinds of practices.. but yeah, he got elected into office, so he still ends up getting quite a bit of power based on that. Bidens and Clintons are not currently in power to the extent that you believe that they need to be held account for anything. Sure they might still maintain some sway over the democrats and parties that are considered opposition to Trump.
Many heavy criminals are not convicted because they have connections with the higher ups or for other reasons, and on the other hand you can get convinced for saying something mean online in some countries.
I am not referring to any "what about-ism." I am referring to Trump. Yes, when he got elected, it was a get out of jail card. I will grant that there might have had been some folks who purposefully voted for Trump because they wanted him to get out of jail and to get out of the various prosecutions that were then in process against him.... and probably the more important fact is that he was voted in, rather than why various voters decided to vote for him - even though surely there is all kinds of variation, and votes are also captured in time too.. and there may well be quite a few folks with regrets about their votes even though they might have not been willing to vote for Kamala, either, even if they could go back in time and unvote for Trump.
That is not a what about-ism, I gave you an explanation why in the eyes of the wider public the terms convict and felon are becoming meaningless.
Felon and convict are different things, and sure they might still have meaning in the eyes of some folks, even if you want to downplay the ideas.
I know areas where nobody at all cares about stuff like that and would not hesitate to associate with a man or woman who is either.
Sure it is true that in some circles it does not matter if a person is a convict and/or a Felon. Trump might want to specifically appoint someone who is a Felon or convict or if the person is conflicted in some way, since his main criteria would likely concern their loyalty. There is a difference between quasi-objective standards and accountability versus forms of personalized rules and surely some of that is on a spectrum, since even a 12 person jury is composed of individuals who ended up potentially getting influenced by the attorneys on each side and brought their own personal baggage into the process.. and the attorneys tried to screen the ones out who they thought would not be good for their side during the jury selection process.
It is the consequence of the environment in which things are happening, that is why I mentioned the speech stuff. As more people get convicted for being mean online, besides censoring themselves, others will care less and less if someone is convicted because most people will be convicted of stupid offenses like this.
Sure there are differences in the kinds of offenses, and some of the offenses might be stupid, as you say, and other kinds of offenses might be more serious.
Imagine something extreme, if you got convicted for simply going out of your house on Saturday. Would anyone care that you are a convict?
Sure you can come up with convictions that are stupid and even oppressive and unfair... but that does not nullify convictions or the legal process in which some folks end up getting found to have had carried out egregious behaviors and they were convicted for them.. of course, within the criminal standard would usually be needing to prove beyond a reasonable doubt and in civil cases the standard to prove might be the pre ponderous of the evidence, so there are differing standards for different kinds of crimes.. and yeah of course, not all laws are fair or enforced fairly.. so yes, there have always been disparities.....
Of course, some folks don't care and they want to either minimize the importance of the criminal conviction or to act like it did not happen. Trump and his team made various efforts to try to remove and/or to destroy some of the records related to various Trump prosecutions (and impeachements) over the years.
It is one useless conviction, the rest is speculative. I can say the same about any previous president and every top democrat, as long as nobody is convicted for those speculations they remain speculations.
Not everyone considers Trump's conviction as trivial, which was part of the reason that he wanted to get it expunged. He probably would have gotten convicted of some other of the pending investigations if he had not been elected, but whatever, he was elected, so enough of the voters thought he deserved a get out of jail card (and perhaps some did not realize the impact of their vote), so in the end, who knows if those matters will come back again, since Trump seems to have a pretty good strangle hold on his current position.
If anything Trump has gotten away with way more than he should have had gotten away with rather than folks picking on him in a "witch trial" kind of context as he frequently likes to proclaim within his deluded and self-absorbed feelings of victimhood (in ways that he many times had brought on such desires of folks to prosecute him).
Yes, rich people get away with a lot of things. People shouldn't care only when it happens with Trump,
Trump brings on some of the attention to himself.. so of course, normies might think about Trump more than others.. and people who are in power should have some checks on them and be held to account. We might not agree on how they are held to account, whether arguing about policy positions or getting the judicial branch or congress to block him in some way or another to the extent that he needs to be blocked or limited, including some folks taking to the streets or even engaging in campaigns online.
and compared to the average person of his class he got away with relatively little.
We are not going to agreed on that part.
Do some digging on what some of these people do. How many Epstein example does it take to realize how much the elites get away with? Trump did not do that one before someone jumps to repeat CNN content.
Of course, there were likely others, besides Trump, involved with the Epstein affairs, yet his dancing around the topic and blocking releases are interesting, even though you are correct that he was not the ONLY one involved in likely pedophilia or getting caught in compromising positions.
Yes his conduct in regards to bitcoin (and crypto) have been all over the place, and surely some not so good things by him or the various organizations connected to him, and perhaps even his kids.
Yes.. 2026. Let's see what happens.. I doubt that there are very many folks (including Trump and/or the efforts of folks in his Cabinets or various appointees) who are really trying to figure out ways that people are empowered by bitcoin - even though sometimes Trump or his various appointed folks will say some things or do some things that make it appear that they are supporting bitcoin rather than getting distracted by various cryptos or even being obsessed with ways to create CBDCs out of stable coins (privatized CBDCs) .. and yeah, it can be problematic to have Tether freezing coins (USDT) based on US government preferences and any of us might get caught up in some kind of a random freezing of the USDT that we might try to hold - which surely should cause pause in regarding how any of us might attempt to use some stable coin rather than BTC.
We cannot address all of the ongoing attacks on bitcoin here, even though from my general perspective, there continue to be all kinds of ways that BTC is being attacked through KYC measures and/or paper bitcoin promotion that might contribute towards slower forms of attack on bitcoin in terms of ways that transacting through paper bitcoins or holding bitcoin paper products are given preferences, and direct ownership of bitcoin is ongoingly punished, even if lip service might be given - yet are the Samurai developers going to be released from Jail and/or have their sentences commuted and/or pardoned? Trump is not in any kind of a hurry to fix those kinds of recent injustices (current events).
My thought is that they don't really consider Bitcoin at all when they are doing geopolitics or dealing with other issues. I don't think they say there and wondering alright if we impose these tariffs will it have a negative impact on the Bitcoin market, or this most recent stuff with Greenland. They should consider it, but they aren't and they are just doing whatever they want. Obviously chaos is not yet favorable to Bitcoin as it is to gold, we are still young and find ourself in an ETF redistribution phase. However, with time even chaotic events like these will boost the price of Bitcoin as it does with silver. See we went down again primarily because of geopolitics as the stock market also went down due to these events!
Based on Trump's past patterns and behaviors that flip flop, it can be difficult to know if he might be doing some of these things to short term manipulate markets and/or surely he could be just using some of his own flip flopping as a kind of negotiations position, too.
I surely don't engage in any attempts to trade short-term BTC price moves, even though if the price goes down my buy order tend to fill and if the BTC price goes up my sell orders tend to fill. Sure if a lot of the orders fill in one direction rather than another direction, then even I might become a bit anxious about the direction or even getting stuck in some price location that seems extreme.
Where are the Europeans in this thread now? If Trump proposed this they would be screaming orange man bad all day long.
As the level of desperation goes up, states will increasingly consider going down these paths. Trump is not immune to either employing draconian measures our other measures to try to co-opt bitcoin in a more friendly seeming way.
Of course, in the whole scheme of things we would like to have freedoms in regards to bitcoin rather than oppressiveness and/or even reporting obligations.
Poll
