Trump policies X

[Tidewater]

I'm in favor of full disclosure.
Honestly, I do not know why the Biden Administration did not do that. I mean, as time went on, it was increasingly clear that they would face Trump in 2024, and releasing damning evidence linking Trump with underage sex would have been bad (maybe catastrophic) right before the election. Why did the Biden Administration not do that?

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I'm in favor of full disclosure.
Honestly, I do not know why the Biden Administration did not do that. I mean, as time went on, it was increasingly clear that they would face Trump in 2024, and releasing damning evidence linking Trump with underage sex would have been bad (maybe catastrophic) right before the election. Why did the Biden Administration not do that?

For starters, they were under a judge's seal until January 2024.

But......given the blanket pardon Hunter Biden got from Daddy......well.......we all know that Trump might be (probably is) the biggest fish in the pond, but he won't be the only one to suffer here. My suspicion is he's been persuaded that this is like the Lewinsky scandal in that enough of his accusers will wind up with problems (Bob Barr, Bob Livingston, Newt Gingrich) that he may deem it a fair trade.

Or maybe the reason he had the MRI done that he lied about and said not only did he not know why he got one but his doctor said it was the best MRI he'd ever seen......maybe he's terminal.

 

[Tidewater]

For starters, they were under a judge's seal until January 2024.

Good point, but the deliberations of justices on the Supreme Court are privileged until the decision is released, but they found their way into the pages of the Washington Post and New York Times.
Taxpayers' private data is not to be released, but somehow, Trump's ended up in the same papers.
Those responsible wag their fingers and say, "Gosh darn it. We are going to investigate this leak and punish those responsible. Promise!"
All kinds of info is privileged yet somehow ends up leaking.
And this one could have saved the country from a second Trump term. That should have been excuse enough to leak it.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Good point, but the deliberations of justices on the Supreme Court are privileged until the decision is released, but they found their way into the pages of the Washington Post and New York Times.
Taxpayers' private data is not to be released, but somehow, Trump's ended up in the same papers.
Those responsible wag their fingers and say, "Gosh darn it. We are going to investigate this leak and punish those responsible. Promise!"
All kinds of info is privileged yet somehow ends up leaking.
And this one could have saved the country from a second Trump term. That should have been excuse enough to leak it.

I mean, I can't argue with you on any of those.

But then remember the last administration couldn't even be honest about the things WE COULD SEE (Biden's obvious deterioration). And YES, folks - Trump is showing it as well this go around.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Good point, but the deliberations of justices on the Supreme Court are privileged until the decision is released, but they found their way into the pages of the Washington Post and New York Times.
Taxpayers' private data is not to be released, but somehow, Trump's ended up in the same papers.
Those responsible wag their fingers and say, "Gosh darn it. We are going to investigate this leak and punish those responsible. Promise!"
All kinds of info is privileged yet somehow ends up leaking.
And this one could have saved the country from a second Trump term. That should have been excuse enough to leak it.

There's also the possibility they've removed anything incriminating on Trump.
Patel and Bondi have had plenty of time.

And the fact Trump can release these himself - which makes me figure he's pushing his chips to the center of the table and daring them to do it (because, well, he doesn't know anything else and he's a lousy poker player).

 

[Tidewater]

There's also the possibility they've removed anything incriminating on Trump.
Patel and Bondi have had plenty of time.

And the fact Trump can release these himself - which makes me figure he's pushing his chips to the center of the table and daring them to do it (because, well, he doesn't know anything else and he's a lousy poker player).

That is true too. All the more reason to have released them while the Democrats had the chance.
I just heard on NPR that Trump has now urged GOP Representatives to vote to release all the Epstein files.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

That is true too. All the more reason to have released them while the Democrats had the chance.
I just heard on NPR that Trump has now urged GOP Representatives to vote to release all the Epstein files.

I just saw that, too. I admit, my eyebrows shot up when I saw it on X. Hopefully sharp-eyed citizens are watching to see which people in Congress throw the truck into reverse and stomp the accelerator.

 

[Tidewater]

On a separate note, I am not in favor of the 50-year mortgage. I think it is a bad idea.
People need to look at how much interest you will pay over a 50-year mortgage.
I asked Gemini to run the numbers and for a $200k house, and it gave me this: Based on a 6.5% interest rate, the total interest payment over the 50-year lifetime of the mortgage would be approximately $476,460.26. $476k in interest alone.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

On a separate note, I am not in favor of the 50-year mortgage. I think it is a bad idea.
People need to look at how much interest you will pay over a 50-year mortgage.
I asked Gemini to run the numbers and for a $200k house, and it gave me this: Based on a 6.5% interest rate, the total interest payment over the 50-year lifetime of the mortgage would be approximately $476,460.26. $476k in interest alone.

And the difference in monthly payments with a 50 year mortgage and a 30 year mortgage are pretty negligible. Most Americans have absolutely no idea how mortgages and loans work.

 

[Bamaro]

That is true too. All the more reason to have released them while the Democrats had the chance.
I just heard on NPR that Trump has now urged GOP Representatives to vote to release all the Epstein files.

Once Pam Blondie opens the trump directed investigation of Dems they can say the files cant be released because of that active investigation.

 

[Tidewater]

Once Pam Blondie opens the trump directed investigation of Dems they can say the files cant be released because of that active investigation.

That's a fair point.
I'm all in favor of protecting the identities of statutory rape victims, but this crap should have been released as soon as EPstein died (unless other prosecutions were in the offing. I would not want to sabotage any other prosecutions.

 

[Tidewater]

And the difference in monthly payments with a 50 year mortgage and a 30 year mortgage are pretty negligible. Most Americans have absolutely no idea how mortgages and loans work.

I have heard a commentator saying that entering into a 50-year ARM is a good thing.
I call an ARM a "I acknowledge that I am a complete blithering moron that deserves to be abused by the bank whenever the bank wants to" mortgage. An ARM is borderline criminal.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

And the difference in monthly payments with a 50 year mortgage and a 30 year mortgage are pretty negligible. Most Americans have absolutely no idea how ANYTHING works.

FIFY

 

[selmaborntidefan]

That's a fair point.
I'm all in favor of protecting the identities of statutory rape victims, but this crap should have been released as soon as EPstein died (unless other prosecutions were in the offing. I would not want to sabotage any other prosecutions.

Ivana Trump died as this all was going on - from an alleged fall down the stairs.
Victoria Giuffrie died as all this was going on.
Epstein himself died - conveniently with the camera off in his prison cell.

And ONE GUY benefits the most from all these deaths.

Now, I'm NOT a conspiracy theorist, and I'm not saying anything.....well, except this would be a blood indictment if Donald Trump was named Hillary Clinton. And we know that because we've seen it.

I recall when Falwell had "The Clinton Chronicles" list of people who died allegedly after run-ins with Bill Clinton. As much as I loathed - and still do - the Clintons....come on. The same type list occurred when Dubya was President.

 

[75thru79]

I have heard a commentator saying that entering into a 50-year ARM is a good thing.
I call an ARM a "I acknowledge that I am a complete blithering moron that deserves to be abused by the bank whenever the bank wants to" mortgage. An ARM is borderline criminal.

I don't know if I would be that harsh. Most people never pay off their mortgage because they move every 10 years or so and start over all again on the 30-year train when they get the new mortgage on the new house. We can argue all day as to whether or not a 50 year mortgage is a bad decision for a prospective buyer. If you know that this is a starter home and you hope to move up in a decade then having the 50 year mortgage will lower your payments and maybe help you qualify for the loan. Once you own the house then all the appreciation will be yours and not the banks (or landlord for that matter).

I don't think I would get a 50 year mortgage but it might be the best decision for some. In any case, it is not a panacea and will not make housing more affordable. Mortgages aren't the problem. it is inflated real estate prices and the only way to bring prices down is get more houses on the market.

 

[92tide]

i can only imagine if this had been biden or obama

Social Media Erupts as US Flag Seen on the Ground Behind Trump at White House

As President Trump returned from Palm Beach on Monday night, some social media users were quick to point out an American flag on the ground behind him.

www.mediaite.com

 

[Tidewater]

I don't know if I would be that harsh. Most people never pay off their mortgage because they move every 10 years or so and start over all again on the 30-year train when they get the new mortgage on the new house. We can argue all day as to whether or not a 50 year mortgage is a bad decision for a prospective buyer. If you know that this is a starter home and you hope to move up in a decade then having the 50 year mortgage will lower your payments and maybe help you qualify for the loan. Once you own the house then all the appreciation will be yours and not the banks (or landlord for that matter).

I don't think I would get a 50 year mortgage but it might be the best decision for some. In any case, it is not a panacea and will not make housing more affordable. Mortgages aren't the problem. it is inflated real estate prices and the only way to bring prices down is get more houses on the market.

I recall very clearly during the 2008 financial crisis, National Public Radio doing a story about a guy who bought a house and three years later could no longer afford to make payments on the house, even though we still have the same job for the same pay. I remember thinking myself, "Wait a minute, if you have a mortgage and you've got the same job for the same pay, how come you can no longer afford to pay your mortgage?" Then it came to me: adjustable rate mortgage or, as I like to call them, an "I admit I'm a complete moron who deserves to get abused by the bank whenever the bank decides he wants to abuse me" mortgage.
Of course, NPR, which sucks at journalism, never asked the obvious question.
I would only sign an adjustable rate mortgage if I absolutely positively knew I was moving in two or three years, it got me a better rate than a 30 year fixed rate mortgage and I could afford to pay the mortgage if the bank increase the rate to the maximum extent allowable by the contract. (If I got a 6% ARM and the contract allowed the bank to increase the rate by only 0.5%/year and I couple afford a 6.5% in year two and a 7% in year three.).
Beyond that, anyone signing an ARM is certifiably insane.

A 50-year mortgage, to me, makes sense only if you can refinance later. I'm not sure interest rates are going appreciably lower in the long term.

 

[jthomas666]

I have heard a commentator saying that entering into a 50-year ARM is a good thing.
I call an ARM a "I acknowledge that I am a complete blithering moron that deserves to be abused by the bank whenever the bank wants to" mortgage. An ARM is borderline criminal.

And we've seen the results of ARMs as well.

Do you remember the commentator who said this? I need to make a note to never take him/her seriously again.

 

[Tidewater]

And we've seen the results of ARMs as well.

Do you remember the commentator who said this? I need to make a note to never take him/her seriously again.

One of the right wing guys from right-wing-o-sphere.
I thought it was ill-advised (both the praise for the policy and the policy itself).

 

[jthomas666]

I don't know if I would be that harsh. Most people never pay off their mortgage because they move every 10 years or so and start over all again on the 30-year train when they get the new mortgage on the new house. We can argue all day as to whether or not a 50 year mortgage is a bad decision for a prospective buyer. If you know that this is a starter home and you hope to move up in a decade then having the 50 year mortgage will lower your payments and maybe help you qualify for the loan. Once you own the house then all the appreciation will be yours and not the banks (or landlord for that matter).

I don't think I would get a 50 year mortgage but it might be the best decision for some. In any case, it is not a panacea and will not make housing more affordable. Mortgages aren't the problem. it is inflated real estate prices and the only way to bring prices down is get more houses on the market.

Eh. Mortgages are A problem created by another problem--real estate prices. People want a house but don't have enough money... banks who will extend credit to anyone with a pulse go "Sure you can afford it, trust me"...lack of regulatory oversight...

ring a bell?

The real problem, the danger lurking in the dark so to speak, is in wild wild west speculation on mortages. And the advent of the 50 year mortgage suggests we're headed back into that particular minefield.

That said, I get what 75thru79 says--In some circumstances it might be a viable option, but probably only for people with a minimum amount of budgetary sense. As a panacea for housing costs...NO. But I can also see why it might look apppealing to an administration desperate to create economic good news.

I suppose one could make the argument that all that interest is tax-deductable so who cares...but then you'd have to do itemized deductions, which is its own little circle of hell.