Comments by "Jack Haveman" (@JackHaveman52) on "Valuetainment" channel.

@mnguardianfan7128 You still can't use a bogus charge to get someone who you believe to be corrupt. They just showed an empty 2 acre lot that was being sold for 2 hundred million dollars. Yet, Mar-a-lago, at 17 acres with a huge ballroom and hotel, swimming pool, multiple tennis courts, gyms and other buildings is only worth 18 million? They declared him guilty, without trial and no defence and demanded he pay 350 million in fines. How is that even possible? Hatred is a powerful drug.
15
@baloo1522 I agree. Not everyone that landed at Normandy, fighting the Nazis was a saint. I'd say that they were all flawed in one way or another. However, that's not the point. It's not that we're flawed, it's our efforts to try to defeat our flaws and the evil that's around us. That's why those who landed at Normandy are heroes. It's because, in spite of their flaws, they risked their lives to defeat a truly evil regime. That's what makes them heroes.
10
@VL1975 There are 61 airlines operating in the United States. It isn't like United has the market cornered. There are lots of options.
6
@jamielancaster01 Apparently, all those issues have been resolved. The SEC has approved the merger a week ago so it would seem that it's now satisfied that all regulations have been followed. Also, just because Shvartsman is guilty in his dealings in this merger, doesn't mean that Trump is guilty of anything. Had there been any proven wrongdoing on Trump's part, you'd be talking about Trump NOT Shvartsman. In other words, the point that you're trying to make is irrelevant.
5
@carlosgarcia5458 He denied that they were doing gain of function research. Then he proceeded to describe what they were doing and it was textbook gain of function research. When he was told that his description was the definition of gain of research, he said that it wasn't and that gain of function was different than his description. I'm paraphrasing but that's what happened.
4
@Musicienne-DAB1995 I have always said that no one exists with who I agree with 100% of the time on 100% of all topics. It's an impossibility. Instead, I take the topic on hand, listen to what they're saying, and make my decision on that and nothing else. I go by the old adage "Keep it simple stupid" or KISS. Don't tangle one issue up with different unrelated topics. It's a pointless game. I think that you're approaching this in the way a reasonable person would.
3
@mikeyg1776 Money is representative of the wealth of a nation. It's an impossibility to try and get goods through direct trading. I can't grow carrots and then try to fill the larder through a barter system. Money represents the value of those carrots, apples, cucumbers, televisions, frying pans, your car......all the things of value in the nation, the gross national product. That allows for an extremely streamlined system of sales in the market system. When you print more money than the national product, you get inflation. The money in circulation must reflect the wealth of the nation or the nation will end in financial chaos.
2
@Control_alt_delete Maybe if Weiner didn't get so angry and spoke in a calm and measured manner, people wouldn't get so suspicious. "Thou dost protest too much" is a natural reaction. Angry hysteria solves nothing and is like throwing gasoline on a fire. The topic was breached and Weiner knew that these allegations existed. He could have and SHOULD have behaved in a dignified manner. Credibility does not go to the one that screams the loudest.
2
@Control_alt_delete I don't have to talk to your 70 year old grandmother. I'm 71 and I've lost a lot of friends, relatives and work associates. Just because people die that doesn't mean that every death is now an innocent demise and we're not to question it. "PBD most likely sold the interview in such a manner then surprised him with nut job stuff." Yeah.....most likely....or most likely not. You don't get points for a "most likely". So, PBD passed on a bunch of questions. That's his choice. It's his show. He can ask or NOT ask whatever he wants. Surely he didn't expect questions like "What's your favourite colour?" or "Do you like ice hockey?". Weiner was in politics. Politicians should be ready for the tough questions especially when he has the record that Weiner has. Then you want to bet that Trump Jr. would react in the same way and used a conspiracy, a well worn out conspiracy about Trump to illustrate your point. Placing a wager isn't evidence either. It's conjecture and means nothing. Besides, this isn't about Trump. It's about the Clintons. Finally, you missed my point, entirely. Weiner's reaction will only lead to a deeper entrenchment of that conspiracy theory. Read all the comments on how people think that he reacted in an hysterical manner which they'll interpret as being highly suspicious. That was my point and those comments lends credence to that point. He should have answered in a calm and rational manner. He could have answered by saying, calmly and rationally, that he feels that this conspiracy is no different than the ones that he didn't ask about. He should have said, in a matter of fact tone, that people die and it doesn't prove or disprove any accusations made. It's an accusation...that's all. Then he should have asked if PBD can show a direct link between those deaths and any real action that the Clintons took that would have caused those deaths, besides knowing the deceased. Knowing the deceased in not evidence of Clinton responsibility for those deaths. Instead, he reacts in anger, so as to intimidate PBD into abandoning this line of questioning, even suggesting that there are questions that shouldn't be asked. Wouldn't politicians love that. Don't ask any tough questions. Make it all a big love fest. You wouldn't want interviewers to treat Trump that way but boy don't you DARE do that to a Democrat. If a person wants to be taken seriously, don't act so totally unhinged. It only validates what people already think.
2
@Control_alt_delete You're STILL not getting it. I never said that his emotional state was evidence. Never said that at all. I never said that he should start laughed it off, either. I said that he should have replied calmly and rationally. I even listed points that he could have made but you ignore it all. People are going to believe as they believe. He shouldn't give them ammunition by losing his temper, interrupting and shouting the way that he did. Weiner already has credibility issues with his criminal record. It didn't help his argument one bit to behave so irrationally, in fact it hurt him. The bottom line is that I was trying to help him with his credibility issues but you won't have it. If he'd have kept his cool, he would have given the perception that he had he was familiar with topic and had points that he'd thought through to the point that he could articulate those thoughts carefully and in a lucid manner. Critical thinkers don't shout and interrupt and that's why he damaged his credibility. For better or worse, people believe that when you have right on your side, you don't have to lose your temper. You let logic and a sense of purpose give you an air of confidence and believability. Any lawyer, in a court of law, knows better than to rant uncontrollably, especially in front of a jury. Perception can be just as important as facts, at times. It may not be right but it's human nature. Weiner didn't offer any facts, logical argument and didn't exactly leave an image of a person who has it together. He who shouts the loudest isn't correct.
2
@ByXavi. “Anyone who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire. That's why we worry about this. Years later, Orwell picked the most universally understood fact, 2 plus 2 equals 4, to illustrate how by perverting this fact into 2 plus 2 equals 5, is a sign of what a totalitarian regime aspires to. They want you to believe the absurd, without question, in order to control you. It's that perversion of truth, as an example, that men can become pregnant, that is an indication that we have a force that wants to control what you believe even though all known facts and science says that it's not possible. Objective truth cannot be tolerated in an authoritarian regime. The Soviet Union underwent this same perversion of facts with Lysenkoism, and untold millions starved. If you stand by and watch our rulers pervert truth, you're contributing to the establishment of a dictatorship. THAT is why we worry about this. Truth is the highest and noblest of all human endeavours. That search must be protected at all costs.
1
@jamesbennettmusic2154 Abraham Accords. He promised to go after peace and that was a great start. Biden STOPPED the efforts to bring peace to the Middle East. He got a good start on the border wall. He couldn't get the funds but he managed to do it anyway. Biden STOPPED the wall and is now selling off the parts that Trump bought. Trump did the "remain in Mexico" deal, meaning that illegals must wait in Mexico if they want to enter the US. Biden STOPPED that deal with Mexico. Also, he didn't have the majority in both the house and senate. That was why he couldn't get funding for the wall. He promised medical ships to California and New York to help with the Covid situation. He got them there.....one day late when everyone in the MSM said it was impossible. He initiated "Operation Warpspeed" which sped up the process to develop an new Covid vaccine. The vaccine that inspired some Democrats to say that they'd never take the Trump vaccine but then, when elected, tried to force everyone in the country to get vaccinated or else. I remember the State of the Union address. Trump pointed out that the black employment numbers were the best ever. Republicans cheered, thinking that this was a good thing. Democrats scowled. I'm not sure why. Apparently working toward a better life doesn't sit well with Democrats if you're black. Things were a lot better for the country, under Trump, than they are for California, under Newsom.
1
Maher knows that if his buddy, Newsom, gets into power, he'll protect Maher's interests. That's all that matters. So what the average guy can't afford to pay rent, let alone buy a home. So what there are people living in the streets, high on drugs or mentally ill. They don't live in Maher's neighbourhood. Who cares? What's high taxes to Maher? There will always be enough money for him to live in luxury. 150 million net worth is a lot of cash and it should be there for him until he passes away. Life is good for Maher. That's all that counts.
1
It's TDS. Hatred is a powerful drug.
1
"If" they think that the parent "might" be abusive. Since when do we socially indict someone BEFORE the crime even happens. That's pre-crime and an ideologue can accuse anyone of committing a possible future crime if it suits the tenets of their belief system. You can't accuse someone of a crime based on a personal stereotype especially when your idea of abuse is disagreeing with something that they've said or been accused of saying.
1
@Razieed That's why the Democrats won't have the first woman candidate for president. They're convinced that the only reason that Hillary and Kamala lost is misogyny. The rest of us know why they lost. It's because they were bad choices. That's why it will almost certainly be a female Republican who will be the first woman president. They have lots of viable candidates who could do it. The Democrats have no one. Democrat women are either too woke or too old.
1
@blackslavers No......she fired dudes for using state computers for private use which involved very crude "locker room talk". I know people who've used company computers for personal use, not even involved in sexual content, and got fired. Talk about national security. Enemy agents use sexualised activity to blackmail CIA and other agents. Those "dudes" were saying things that maybe they'd do anything to keep their spouses and families from finding out.....including blabbing state secrets that could jeopardise the lives of other agents. I gotta say that you're completely out of touch.
1
@Bc232klm The only ones who would cringe are the ones that are scared that the law is going to catch up with them because of the awareness this film brings to us all. I hope you break into sweats every time that there's an unexpected knock at the door.
1
@alphapablo3514 There is no evidence that he is in the client list because we've not seen who Epstein's clients are because that list has NEVER been released. Guilt by association does not have legal status in the US. Also, Matthew Colangelo, who was the 3rd in line to become the DOJ, after Merrick Garland, stepped down to become an assistant prosecutor, in a district in New York, to help go after Trump. That would be like a company manager, quitting his job, to become the night shift foreman in another company. It makes no sense. It smells, BAD, of corruption. Worse, no one knows what the underlying crime was that this hush money was trying to protect. Non-disclosure agreements are legal unless money is passed to cover a crime. Now....tell me what crime was Trump trying to cover up. That doesn't mean that Trump is a saint but you've allowed hatred to be your guide instead of the facts.
1
Actually, I think that she does get it. Democrats are convinced that they only reason that Hillary and Kamala lost is because they think American men hate women and that it would be pointless to try to run another woman. They'd only lose because of "patriarchy" and the Democrats want to win. That's the point that she's making and it's a good one. The only reason they pushed Tulsi out is because she went after Kamala and destroyed her chances in 2020. Don't go after the Democrat elites or you're out of the party. Tulsi didn't kiss the ring.
1
@sthubbins4038 "most probable"? LOL. I think that it's "most probable" that it was Hillary that offed Epstein to protect her husband and any future presidential plans that she might have. Bill Clinton has a lot more ties to Epstein than Trump has so my claim makes more sense. So, let's get back to facts instead of the speculations of a guy who financially supported his p---phile brother.
1
@pokemonfan2630 I'm not Christian but what I can tell you is that God gave humans the freedom to choose their own path, individually and collectively. It's up to us, to YOU, to try to make a better world and to uphold truth and justice. If God did it for us, it wouldn't come from our hearts and the fact that this is happening proves that we, as humans, can be horrifically corrupted. Adam and Eve rejected the ONE thing that God asked them to do. Do you really think that the rest of us wouldn't do the same? That's the point of the stories of God. It's to show us an image of perfection that we can try to attain. I know a lot of people believe it to be true but the lessons of the Bible run a lot deeper than whether it's true or not. It's unfortunate that people cannot or will not see it.
1
@toshi240 It's WAY bigger than a "Jew" problem. It's everywhere. While you're chasing Jews, hundreds of thousands of kids are trafficked every year by Gentiles. You've narrowed your search down and an attitude like that can only allow this trafficking to flourish everywhere else. I can only hope that this isn't what you would like to see happen.
1
@mnguardianfan7128 The prosecution must have consulted with the Deutsche Bank, the business that was alleged victim of the fraud, then. The bank did show up at his sentencing trial. It seems that the loan, in question, was quite acceptable to the bank and they even said that they'd do business with Trump again. My sister was a real estate appraiser for 30 plus years. The banks were one of her major employers. A person would put up property as collateral for a personal or business loan, claiming that their property was worth X amount of dollars. The bank would contact my sister to appraise the property in question, at the borrower's expense and she would submit an official appraisal which is bound by strict guidelines. If the borrower's claim of X value of his property is too high, they don't call the police. They tell the borrower what the property is actually worth and they either reject the loan application or reduce the amount allowed based on that property value. Once again, they do NOT call the police. My sister has been stopped on the street by irate borrowers who angrily claim that she undervalued the property and that her assessment is ruining their lives. However, she has no choice. There is a formula in deciding the value of real estate and she could lose her licence if she didn't follow the assessment rules. If you have money in a bank that would allow a loan, without following protocols, get that money out right now, if possible. Your money isn't safe there and you're risking another situation like the one in 2008. Giving out loans without any real knowledge of the value of collateral is piss poor banking. This is entirely bogus and is politically motivated.
1