There are a multiple reasons why a leader might want to slap some tariffs on particular goods coming from various countries. In no particular order as to which are the most important/lucrative/effective/etc.

Option 1. Said country has a stronger production base and the country putting forth tariffs. This allows the country with the weaker production base to better compete. Does it cause the average consumer to have to pay more? Yes, it does, but the cost is generally fairly low and the outcome is keeping the home base economy in that particular sector from further dropping off.

Option 2: Said country has weaker worker protection, so the home country can better compete against the lower cost of production due to lower worker protections. Cost is same as option 1, as is the result. Depending on your political views, this can be good or bad. Some countries, such as China, have nearly no worker protection, so a tariff against that might even be seen as morally the best choice, even if consumers end up paying more.

Option 3: Said country manipulates their currency to achieve better pricing in flooding markets (typically with cheaper and lower quality goods). Does this increase the cost of to the consumer, yes, but usually bolsters the workforce as well. Again, this can be seen as a morally acceptable retaliation against country who manipulate their currency to get a leg up on the competition.

Note: while option 1 might be morally right from one country’s standpoint, it is often seen as morally wrong from the opposite country’s standpoint. Neutral parties will see it less as a moral issue and more as a protectionist issue. Whereas 2 and 3 have one side that is morally right and one side that is morally wrong.

Option 4: Tariffs can be used as a sort of sanction against countries that are behaving badly. As with Options 2 and 3, this is usually a retaliation against something the original country has done wrong. Let’s say Mexico and their lax approach to stopping illegal border crossings into the US.

Option 5: Tariffs can also be used as a bargaining chip. Let’s say that you are New Zealand and you see that Australia is getting too buddy buddy with China, you might say to Australia, “We’re gonna slap a tariff on your imported goods because you are dealing with countries that we view as hostile” and then Australia now has less incentive to deal with China in a way that would negatively effect New Zealand. One could argue that Options 4 and 5 are essentially the same, but generally one is more of a threat against direct action (or inaction in the Mexico example) whereas Option 5 is more about a general approach toward other countries and who they actively trade with.

Option 6: Trade war. This isn’t so much different than any of the above so much as it is more drastic. Options 1-5 rarely see tariffs reach into the high double digits, but trade wars can see tariffs hitting into the triple digits. This is basically the last step before a full on trade embargo. You hit them so hard with tariffs that they essentially can’t trade with you any longer.

Option 7: Raising funds. Let’s say that you wanted to bring in more money for the government and you didn’t want the average citizen to have to pay. Do you raise the tax rates? You can, but what if you didn’t have to? What if, instead, you could raise tariffs on luxury imports? That’s certainly one approach. Let’s say the average laptop costs 1,500, if you slapped a 10% tariff on the importing of laptops, the cost becomes 1,650. You are hoping that most people who can afford the 1,500 can also afford 1,650. Let’s change this to yachts instead (yes, I know, there are multiple layers to acquiring yachts and importing them is just one example, but that’s the example we will use). Say Billy, pie to the face, Gates decides that he really likes that yacht he saw when he was hanging out with Epstein. Well, said yacht might cost as much as 5 million dollars. Raise the tariffs on yacht imports and bam, you just $500,000 from one transaction alone and that’s just with a 10% tariff. This tariff isn’t likely to harm the economy because Bill “I’d like to vax the whole of Africa with my poison syringe” Gates will buy the yacht even if tariffed to a high extent. Yes, there are ways he can try to get around the tariff, but that’s why you get the experts in to tell you when and where to cap your tariffs.

Note: Tariffs can also be levied as a combination of different Options. You might find that China is better at producing a certain good, manipulating their currency so said good is cheaper, pushing their workers in slave like conditions, and being an all-around bad actor.

Option 8: the retaliation tariff. One might levy a tariff on another country because that country decided to slap you with a tariff. This could be a tariff on the same exact good or a different good.

Pros: Good negotiating tool Can raise lots of funding Can get other countries to stop their bad actions Can protect jobs at home Can force countries to rethink their shady economic dealings with others

Cons: Can drive countries away from wanting to trade with you Can cost consumer extra money Can result in retaliation (such as tariffs or trade wars)

Proper use of tariffs can prove to be an effective measure at combatting bad actors, protecting production at home, drive fairer negotiations, etc. improper usage can tank the economy and reputation of a country.

TLDR: there are numerous reasons for tariffs, including protecting your production base, combatting manipulative countries, negotiating with foreign governments that might not have your best interests in mind, punishing foreign governments for shady practices, retaliating against foreign tariffs, and starting trade wars and more.

Second lot of raw milk with bird flu found in California. 46 states allow for selling raw milk dependent on the circumstances, 29 allow for selling raw milk with similar restrictions to pasteurized milk.

Both lots were from California, sounds like a California problem to me. How about we ban California?

I have a feeling that stuff like this is one of the reasons why the steal was allowed in 2020. More bad actors revealed themselves under the Biden admin than any time that I can remember. Being anti-Trump has been in fashion since they decided to flip that switch early in his primary run, but it became real emboldened after the steal.

1. Trump used tariffs in his first term and the economy was booming.

2. Most of the tariffs Trump proposes are against countries like China. To expand upon this, China not only has some horrific factory practices, but they also manipulate their currency, the combination of this makes their goods ridiculously cheap so they can flood the market. Their goods are also largely crap that doesn’t last long and, in more extreme cases, are really bad for people’s health. Because their government is trash, they are able to undercut the US and our allies when it comes to prices. Tariffs should help with this.

3. Biden has largely continued the Trump tariffs especially the tariffs on China. Tariffs can be an effective tool for keeping a country like China on their back heels (especially when paired with strong leadership like Trump).

4. Tariffs can be problematic when paired with Democrat style regulations. If the tariffs increase the cost of imported goods and the regulations increase the cost of domestic goods, we the people are completely screwed. Whereas a Trump style regulatory reform should allow manufacturing to come roaring back to life.

5. What the left doesn’t tell you is that other countries impose tariffs on US goods and we don’t always reciprocate under weaker leadership. Trump uses tariffs to force other countries to lower their tariffs on our goods or start a trade war with us. Most countries capitulate and tariffs on both sides are dropped and it ends up being good for both countries.

I can’t remember how to post/quote Q drops, but 1559 looks promising. Viv[A] vs Viv[e] could be interpreted as Chaney vs Cheney, in which case DECLAS is on the menu

I’ve seen it stated before, but it seems good to reiterate: attempted fraud and actual fraud have significantly different sentences. My guess is that there are some particularly nasty big fish that are being allowed to cheat so that the hammer of justice can be swift and effective.

Trump team/white hats stopped enough of the steal to show us that we’ve won. Next comes the precipice (Biden saying private contractors can now participate in Ukraine was [as if they weren’t already]? Maybe but I expect it’ll be more than just this particular event). After the precipice, swift justice. Disclaimer, I don’t have a crystal ball, so take anything I pontificate with a grain of salt.

Exactly, still far too many need to be awake and, again, precipice to me is far more severe than anything we’ve seen yet.

The Trump win was a great breath of fresh air and a nice confirmation that things are moving forward at a nice pace.

White hats in control? We are watching a show? Military is the only way?

Any of these three could explain what we are seeing. Either the white hats have already begun to move or the black hats have something up their sleeve and the military has to step in to stop them.

What about the precipice? I don’t believe that we’ve hit anything that could be called such. So maybe we need to stay buckled.

It is actually a fairly complex issue. The heritage foundation, which is a conservative think tank, came up with the idea along with several hundred of what they call scholars. The left and the media took the most extreme parts of project 2025 and tried to smear all conservatives, MAGAs, anons, Pedes, etc. Which lead to the simplest approach being a repudiation of project 2025.

Now, since project 2025 is so large, it shares some ideas with Trump. For example, securing the border and deporting illegals, getting rid of redundant Federal Departments, fixing the economy and inflation, re-establishing American energy independence, etc.

So, we can see that project 2025 is good, bad, and ugly. Matt Walsh and Bannon, realizing that from a certain point of view Trump will be enacting project 2025 (or at least portions of it), appear to be trolling leftists into freaking out over what is a solid Trump agenda.

I’ll add that Bannon and Walsh themselves have always been a bit more hardline than Trump, so they are probably in favor of more of project 2025 than Trump. So Bannon and Walsh might even like to see as much as 75% of project 2025 put into play.

This is, of course, just my take on it. Walsh and Bannon might just be wanting project 2025 and Trump disagrees with them. I can’t really see Trump suddenly being favorable of everything in project 2025 though, so I’m not particularly worried unless he himself starts talking it up.

Edit: I should add that the heritage foundation, while conservative, is not MAGA, so it is entirely possible that they attempted to slip in overly harsh and untenable ideas into the project to make MAGA look bad. Heck, they could be straight up plants to make conservatives look bad, I haven’t done a deep dive into who they are, I just know that some of their ideas over the past 20 years have been good and others have been atrocious.

First of all, Project 2025 has hundreds of ideas to implement. Some of which are fine, others great, some not so much. So, in actual truth, Trump is likely to enact some of Project 2025 just because it was already in line with MAGA.

Secondly, Matt Walsh and Bannon look to be doing a bit of trolling.

Lastly, people are emboldened after a win. Especially those who’ve been attacked and arrested. I’d wager that Walsh and Bannon like to watch the leftists squirm after what they (especially Bannon) have been put through.

I’m actually feeling confident and excited that good times will be rolling soon. However, I am exhausted by this election season. The media is so incredibly obnoxious about everything.

It’s a bad thing they Trump wants to protect women? Ok freaks.

How many more Diddy-sphere endorsements does Kamala need before the normies start connecting the dots?

I’m unsure as to which of the following will happen:

1. White hats stop the steal, Trump wins in a landslide.
2. White hats allow the steal, but it is so obvious that everyone knows (more votes than there are voters and such)
3. Black hats realize it is too big to rig and so they institute some crazy event that disrupts the election.

Somebody needs to photoshop Biden biting the babies on Halloween onto the cover of the book. Fire the meme cannons! Dems eat their own!

I like to use New Hampshire as an example because, depending on the source, they have anywhere from 800,000 (this number makes far more sense when you look at the average amount of people registered per state) registered voters to 1.1 million registered voters. The first number being approx how many people voted in the state in 2020 and the second number being higher than the amount of eligible voters in the state. So, either way you look at it, New Hampshire either has 100% turnout or 100% voter registration. Normal voter turnout is somewhere in the 50-65% range depending on various factors. The media loves to misconstrue what voter turnout means. You can either use the number of voters compared to eligible voters or the number of voters compared to registered voters or even the number of voters compared to total citizens of the State.

An NPC might ask what the big deal is. Well, let's say 60% of registered voters actually vote in New Hampshire. That would be 480,000 to 660,000 total votes (depending on whether you take the 800,000, or the 1,100,000 as the actual number of registered voters. Let's just use the 800,000. Let's say that 480,000 of them voted and let's say it goes 75% to Trump. That gives you 360,000 Trump votes (the actual 2020 count was 365,000 to Trump) and 120,000 to Biden (actual vote count to Biden was 425,000). This leaves a gap of 240,000. Let's say that you are the Democrats, you're pissed cause Trump walloped Biden. So you trot out 305,000 extra votes bringing Biden up to 425,000. 480,000 plus 305,000, well that's 785,000. Which, compared to either the 800,000 or the 1,100,000 is a turnout of 98% or 71%. The media ran with the second number, Since it is difficult to pin down the exact amount of registered voters in New Hampshire in 2020, I can't tell you what the actual voter turnout number should be, but my guess is that it is closer to the 98% than the 71%, cause the 71% assumes that every eligible voter is also registered to vote. So again, New Hampshire is an excellent example of how screwed up our election system has become.

As of end of day Tuesday (the statistics are always a day behind it seems), Republicans hold a slight lead in early votes cast. Add in that independents are more likely to vote Trump than Harris and I wouldn’t be surprised if Harris needs to bridge at least a 5-10 ten point gap to take back the lead.

Disclaimer: this only shows party affiliation, not actual votes. (Me personally, I actually think far more Dems vote Trump than Republicans vote Harris, so more like a 10-15 point gap, but that’s just my personal opinion)

Here is what we know: Deep state/cabal/whatever term you want to use owns insane amounts of wealth. Said group(s) will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Which likely includes civil and criminal cases awarding damages to those who have been burdened, beat down, attacked, etc by said group(s).

So, whether the take down of these scumbags in itself is enough to right the ship economically and financially, the application of their wealth to the rightful people (average citizens all around the world) should more than fix the world economy. If America needs to start up hundreds of thousands of small businesses, well, all the money stolen from us by the deep state(etc) should be returned and we should have the ability to start said businesses without too much trouble because we’ll have the necessary resources and the right people in power to facilitate whatever it takes to get not only the US back on track, but also the world.

I'm not saying that witches don't exist and that these reddit morons aren't being used by truly evil people, but stuff like freezing project 2025 and blue wave spell? Nah, that's just straight up gullible people thinking they are somehow tapping into some mystical source

Unfortunately, I do believe that these same people are opening up themselves to be tools to be used by actual witches, demons, etc. Which is the real problem with all these "oh look at me, I'm on reddit hexing Travis Kelce cause I want to be besties with Taylor Swift and he is in the way." It takes more than just playing at being a witch. As I said before, I do believe that it opens up the spirit to be used by the actual bad guys.

Sort of like the spiritual version of those that Rush Limbaugh used to call "useful idiots." Stay safe out there, my friends. The dangerous people out there are getting desperate.

That’s the million dollar question. Stocks that have been identified as part of the GME basket are GME (of course), KOSS, AMC (though many rightfully point out that their CEO has been quick to stop any sort of runs), BBBY (which you may only acquire bonds right now, but you short a bond, so no short squeeze there [doesn’t mean there isn’t potential for money to be made, just a different market mechanism]) IEP is supposed to be a part of it (Carl Icahn), also Newell (Brett Icahn).

Some speculative involvement: DJT (but this one has its merit outside of the GME basket as well), BB, Toys r US, LEGO (private company so nothing to be done here).

Other companies: RUM, much like DJT, it does well when the deep state does poorly. BYON (formerly overstock, some people speculate they are involved), most of the other companies that come to mind are private (PSA card grading, Pokémon cards, both of which are now a large part of GMEs announced future programs)

All that to say, there is a lot of speculation and the best bet is to research each company on your own and see if you like (for example, many like KOSS because they aren’t manipulated by options)

I’m not a financial expert, so none of this constitutes official financial advice. Also, lots of people out there will push for their favorite stock and not see that there are various reasons that different people like different stocks or that some people like to be diversified. Just be wary is all, never invest more than you can afford.

The 9 year victim part isn’t new. The fake news just rarely ever mentions the victims ages. Based on some digging I’ve done, victims include a nine year old, several teens (more than one of which was under 18), dozens of “college aged” victims, I’m guessing some of whom are 17, and dozens of adults (most of whom were 20-25).

Now, I’m not trying to say that preying upon a young adult is worse than preying upon children, but I am saying that none of the victims appear to be adults who are mature and aware of what might happen to them in these situations. They all appear to have been lured into the seedy underbelly of the music world.

I’m glad this is coming to light, but we need to push and make sure that everyone goes down. This isn’t something that Diddy could have managed to pull off without 1. A lot of flunkies assisting. 2. A lot of enablers who were aware and did nothing.

True, based on how Superstonk responded to some of RC’s tweets, the TDS is to get people to sell any of the basket stocks. BBBY might be the catalyst, GME might be the moon shot, but I have a feeling there are at least a dozen or so skyrocketing stocks when all is said and done.

Like I said in another thread:

I see three options

1. Sheriff is lying his butt off
2. This dude is an alphabet agency plant who has infiltrated the Trump movement and was recently given new marching orders.
3. This dude is an alphabet agency manipulated sleeper agent who was activated.

Potentially a combination of 2 and 3 could be the case as well.

He definitely has what one would call an alternative media outlet and a quick perusal of his content shows that he's pro-Trump and potentially even an anon. So, again, either he's being railroaded by corrupt California or he's some sort of plant/sleeper agent.

Of course, this is still fresh so it could be something far more wild.

The average citizen has zero say in whether or not they can get away with not paying taxes (even if you've got the best lawyers in your corner, the government will do everything they can to try and jail and/or destroy you)

That being said, the level of hard evidence required in order to prove that somebody is aware of their government's worse crimes and is still paying taxes because they want to fund said government in an attempt to allow said government to still commit those crimes, liability becomes a really tough proof at that point.

Let's invent a fake country named Bidentopia. Bidentopia actively commits atrocities like human, drug, and sex trafficking. The average citizen of Bidnetopia knows the government does some bad things, but has no idea who is actually in charge of said horrible things. Which means most of them aren't liable.

Now, let's say that you have an elitist class that funds the government, endorses the government, uses their journalism to hide the government's evils, etc. Well, now you've got a group that could be seen as liable.

Let's put it this way:

Should it be possible? No (except in extreme situations.) The exact date you can switch in and out candidates depends on the states themselves.

But when's the last time that the left let that stop them? Seriously, when has the left ever let the law keep them from pushing their agenda, stealing elections, shoving crap down our throats, etc.

Based on a bit of research, there are only 3 conclusions that can be made about this.

1. Sheriff is lying his butt off.
2. This dude is a deep state plant that infiltrated his way into a (let's call it Trump adjacent) podcasting/alternative media scene so that he could eventually get closer to Trump for an assassination attempt.
3. Something snapped and this dude went from being an ally of the Trump campaign into being a would-be assassin. (perhaps one of the alphabet agencies got a hold of him?)

I suppose that some combination of 2 and 3 could also be true.