Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - Mod Warning updated in OP 12/2/26

19389399419439441863

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭Field east


    is there any possibility that there is nothing in the files implicating any wrong doing by Trump. But Trump is using the files - by not releasing them- to deflect the media. Away from other ‘things ‘ that he is doing/wants to get done. Anything thing/any strategy goes in the US

    T



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭Field east


    if Maxwell is not ‘too upset’ about telling ‘alternatives to the truth’ then I can see Trump pardoning her if she agrees to go before Congress to say what Trump wants her to say. I’d say that if the above is to happen that she will have to , beforehand, sign a long winded document containing all the necessary statements favourable to Trump.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭Field east


    I am trying to figure this 1000% out. I’ll use an example. Say, a product costs €10 and the cost is reduced by %50 , the price is then €5. Now if it is reduced by 100% then it is free .now , if the price is reduced by 1000% then the ‘seller’ gives the ‘purchaser’ €100 along with the product . So to clarify the above the purchaser is out of pocket by €10 before any reductions were implemented. But when the 1000% reduction was put in place he was better off by €100

    Am I ‘off the head’ or what with the above interpretation?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,426 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I think really it's the other way around. Trump seemed to use other events at the time such as his big bullsh*t bill, Israel, and tariffs, to have Bondi casually slip in that they were closing the case on Epstein, in the hopes it would largely go unnoticed/ignored.

    It had the opposite effect though where they were instantly pulled up on it, even by a lot of his own most ardent supporters, and it became a bigger story than all those things. The Streisand Effect; the more you try to censor or hide information, that in itself draws more attention to it.

    The prevailing theory by most is that there's nothing actually incriminating in the files against Trump, but that if the files were released, Trump's ties with Epstein would be shown to be far more prevalent than previously known. Likewise with others who were probably friends with both Trump and Epstein. What's in the files may not be incriminating, but would still be hugely publicly damaging. We know Trump & Epstein were friends for a long time. The files could show a lot of visits, trips etc that they had.

    That seems to be what Trump is trying to limit/prevent. He's said previously that he'd be hesitant to release the files because "some people" may be mentioned in them even though they did nothing wrong.

    Likewise it would explain why the DoJ under Biden didn't release them, because there may not actually be enough incriminating evidence in them to justify criminal investigations into people, and releasing the files could have been seen to be defamatory. Biden/Harris wouldn't have ordered the DoJ to do so just to help themselves out politically.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Apparently some goons from DOJ are in the process of meeting with her - I reckon what she says will dictate whether she gets to take the stand or is moved to a max security prison - there’s no way DOJ is impartial at this point and if there’s even a whiff of scandal against Trump, she’ll likely meet a similar end to Epstein



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,687 ✭✭✭valoren


    It goes someway to explain that 20 conservatives "debate" as well. If you're fed American exceptionalism since you're young and consume media that provides nothing but confirmation bias then when you get exposed to other opinions which challenge your thinking then it can lead to an aggressive siege mentality. I don't think it's a coincidence since the emergence of smart phones and social media that never before have people been able to pierce through and engage with regular Americans. You can go on any social media and go town with such regulars. Per the Youtube debate, you can see how irate and deranged some are by simple disagreement and basic common sense. It was an anger and fear that was ripe for exploiting and so perhaps this assisted in giving us POTUS 45 and 47.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,350 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Maybe the U.S. should put Trump in as the numerator at the vote tally after U.S. national election day. He would obviously be an outstanding teller, the best so far.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,350 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Prenup between DOJ and Maxwell: You are not obliged to say anything unless it is what we want you to say, but whatever you do say had better align with what we want the U.S public to hear or……

    Trump announces deal on Truth Social, wishes Maxwell well twice.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,873 ✭✭✭Tenzor07


    With the amount of knowledge that Ghislaine Maxwell has, will they fly her in to testify and will that Boeing jet make it?



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 44,951 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    its not mathematically possible to reduce a price by more than 100% but Mr Dick Tiny does not have the capacity to comprehend that.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    Yeah I mean that’s a totally fair summary of how this might roll, given what this administration have done since January.which in itself is bizzare- we’re now totally attuned to what the new “normal” is for this crowd- we’re not in the least shockable anymore - if we can think of the daftest thing that could happen, we’re probably not far off what will happen 😀



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,426 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    I can see Trump ultimately snookering himself. If they arrange for Maxwell to go before Congress or similar and defend Trump, if she gets any benefits from that (nicer prison, reduction in sentence or even a pardon), it's pure quid pro quo especially since there were no plans for anything to do with Maxwell when Bondi announced they were closing the case on Epstein.

    Any benefit to Maxwell whereby she defends Trump at all, and it is clear as day she's covering for him, and I even think a lot of Trump's own supporters won't just accept it (particularly those already criticising Trump for closing the case on Epstein).



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    A 1000% increase is a 10x higher on the current cost, a 1000% decrease is 10x lower on the current cost, the math be mathing.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,428 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    I see that the DOJ have reacted well to the fact that Alina Habba wasn't confirmed as District Attorney.

    They fired the person that got the job instead of her.

    The Justice Department on Tuesday said it fired Desiree Leigh Grace as the newly appointed U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, hours after federal judges in the state chose her over President Donald Trump's pick, Alina Habba.

    The announcement came after federal judges in New Jersey opted not to appoint Habba, Trump's former personal attorney, as the state's top federal prosecutor on a permanent basis. Trump appointed Habba as the state's acting U.S. attorney in March.

    "This Department of Justice does not tolerate rogue judges -- especially when they threaten the President's core Article II powers," Attorney General Pam Bondi posted on X in announcing Grace's firing

    That's just open corruption without even the slightest attempt to hide it.

    And they'll get away with it too.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,673 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Let's say an item costs a hundred euro. And its cost drops 1000%. Are you telling me the hundred euro item is still above zero? What number is it at exactly? Methinks you're struggling with the maths. 😂



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,106 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    100% of €20 is €20. You can't reduce it by 1000%. Basic maths.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 31,322 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Obviously he was being sarcastic. For emphasis. Or something.



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 44,951 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Ok, so you’re saying the maximum amount an item can increase is 100%?



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 45,548 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It’s business language for 10x lower, you guys are starting to make maga look like Mensa members



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,612 ✭✭✭twinytwo


    No he clearly isn't - you cant reduce the price of something by more than N-100% - going negative isnt possible, unless you want pay customers to take your good. You can increase the price of something to as many % as you want.

    Post edited by twinytwo on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,106 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    No, but if you decrease something by 100% you have nothing left. Increasing by 100% means double the initial amount.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 31,322 ✭✭✭✭looksee


    Mathematically it may be possible to reduce by 1000%, but practically, in the real world, it is not. No one mentioned increase the discussion was about reduction. This is a stupid discussion.



  • Subscribers, Paid Member Posts: 44,951 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    digging-thank-you.gif

    to reiterate, its IMPOSSIBLE to reduce the price of anything by more than 100%

    after that you are not reducing its price, your giving it away for free.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,215 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    If something costs $100 and you reduce by 99% then it would cost $1

    If something costs $100 and you, reduce it by 1000% it now costs -$900



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,350 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    I only hope and wish her well on her choice of lawyers, both constitutional and criminal. She will do well to cover herself with a multitude in lawyers.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 45,548 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    Just stop FFS! You cannot make a price ten times lower than it is. It's not business language, its ptimary school maths for Christ's sake!

    If the price is €100, making it ten times (€100 × 10 = €1,000) is not going to do much for your company despite sales skyrocketing!

    🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

    Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/ .



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,220 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    Software developer here. We do actually have a customer (quite a large retailer) who does percentage decreases the weird way that Trump is doing it.

    Ye are all correct that increasing one item from €50 to €100 is a 100% increase, whereas decreasing another item from €100 to €50 is just a 50% decrease. However they want those price changes to cancel each other out for internal reporting purposes, so we calculate the latter as a 100% decrease. It pained me to program that calculation. I don't know how common it is in business.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 33,133 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl




Advertisement
Advertisement