Philadelphia Inquirer exposes Fetterman

maypole

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2022
1,439
602
1
trump is a grifter and con man and anyone falling for his phony act is a sucker. He has no real political principles. He saw where the suckers were (repiglican party) and tailored his fake political views for them.
Oz is just a quack.
 

LafayetteBear

Well-Known Member
Dec 1, 2009
47,513
21,185
1
You aren’t this stupid. The MSM will bend over backwards to find dirt on every Republican candidate, but will also bend over backwards to protect Dims.

This isn’t about the fact that Fetterman comes from money. It is about the fact that the blue-collar everyman image he created is bullshit. If Fetterman was a Republican, he would have been exposed a LONG time ago and the entire MSM would pounce on it. As it is, you first heard about it on a Penn State message board.
Why can't it be a little of both? I don't pretend to be an authority on Fetterman or his background, but the accounts I HAVE read suggest that his parents started with little, made a bunch of money, and he spent his early years in privilege. Then, a friend died, and he decided to focus more on social welfare activity, and spent years doing it. That doesn't make him a "blue collar" person, but it certainly runs counter to the characterization of him as a spoiled rich kid. Funny how so many people are neither black nor white, but gray. And I'm not talking about skin color.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,669
25,188
1
Doc Hollywood made his money by selling fraudulent diet supplements. He made money by harming people.

Fetterman could have run his father's company and become just like Dr. Oz but he instead decided to help people.
The supplements harmed no one.🙄
 

LioninHouston

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 12, 2005
26,824
40,532
1
Last post yesterday 10:32 pm.
Catnap to 3:26 am to post some more.
Then another catnap and up at 6:53 am to resume posting with no end in sight.
All to preach bullshit to a couple dozen fellow fascists.
Yet another worthless post? You should DEFINITELY take a break until you can think of something worthy to say. See you next month.
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
22,616
5,461
1
The supplements harmed no one

Selling fake medical "cures" does harm people. Spreading false medical information does harm people. And he did it all to make money.

What do real-world doctors have to say about the advice dispensed on “The Dr. Oz Show”? Less than one-third of it can be backed up by even modest medical evidence.​
If that sounds alarming, consider this: Nearly 4 in 10 of the assertions made on the hit show appear to be made on the basis of no evidence at all.​
The researchers who took it upon themselves to fact-check Dr. Oz and his on-air guests were able to find legitimate studies related to another 11% of the recommendations made on the show. However, in these cases, the recommendations ran counter to the medical literature.​
“Consumers should be skeptical about any recommendations provided on television medical talk shows,” the researchers wrote in a study published this week in BMJ. “Viewers need to realize that the recommendations may not be supported by higher evidence or presented with enough balanced information to adequately inform decision making.”​
Critics of Dr. Mehmet Oz, an accomplished cardiac surgeon with degrees from two Ivy League universities, complain that his show is little more than an hour-long infomercial for weight-loss fads like green coffee bean extract. (The Federal Trade Commission has sued the company that hawks this dubious product.) A spokesman for the Center for Inquiry accused him of selling “snake oil.” In June, a Senate subcommittee took him to task for telling his viewers (who number 2.9 million on any given day) things like: “I’ve got the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. It’s raspberry ketones.”​
A large group of physicians, pharmacists and other researchers from Canada had their own questions about programs like “The Dr. Oz Show.” So they set out to see whether the “skepticism and criticism from medical professionals” was warranted.​
The Canadians focused on “The Dr. Oz Show” and “The Doctors,” another daily talk show that averages 2.3 million viewers per day. After watching two episodes of each program, they hypothesized that only half of the claims made on the shows could be supported with actual evidence. They also calculated that they would need to review 158 specific recommendations to see whether their hypothesis was correct.​
Lucky for them, the shows are rife with recommendations -- 12 in a typical episode of “The Dr. Oz Show” and 11 in an episode of “The Doctors.” So members of the research team watched 40 episodes of each show, which were randomly selected among all the episodes that aired in the first five months of 2013.​
They found that 32% of the 479 recommendations made on “The Dr. Oz Show,” either by the host or his guests, fell under the heading of “general medical advice.” Another 25% of the claims were about diet (i.e., foods that boost the immune system) and 18% were about weight loss.​
Among all of these recommendations, the researchers randomly selected 80 from each show and looked to see what evidence, if any, could back them up. Two team members conducted independent searches, spending up to an hour on each one. “In an attempt to be as fair as possible” to the shows, they wrote, they “used a relatively broad definition of support.”​
And yet only 21% of the recommendations on “The Dr. Oz Show” could be supported by what the researchers considered “believable” evidence. Another 11% were supported by “somewhat believable” evidence.​
Good or so-so evidence contradicted 11% of the claims made on “Dr. Oz” and 13% of the claims made on “The Doctors.”​
The researchers also noted that for both shows combined, 40% of the recommendations mentioned a specific benefit of the intervention being touted. The size of the benefit was discussed in fewer than 20% of cases, possible harms or side effects came up less than 10% of the time, and potential conflicts of interest were mentioned in less than 1% of cases.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: maypole

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,669
25,188
1
Selling fake medical "cures" does harm people. Spreading false medical information does harm people. And he did it all to make money.

What do real-world doctors have to say about the advice dispensed on “The Dr. Oz Show”? Less than one-third of it can be backed up by even modest medical evidence.​
If that sounds alarming, consider this: Nearly 4 in 10 of the assertions made on the hit show appear to be made on the basis of no evidence at all.​
The researchers who took it upon themselves to fact-check Dr. Oz and his on-air guests were able to find legitimate studies related to another 11% of the recommendations made on the show. However, in these cases, the recommendations ran counter to the medical literature.​
“Consumers should be skeptical about any recommendations provided on television medical talk shows,” the researchers wrote in a study published this week in BMJ. “Viewers need to realize that the recommendations may not be supported by higher evidence or presented with enough balanced information to adequately inform decision making.”​
Critics of Dr. Mehmet Oz, an accomplished cardiac surgeon with degrees from two Ivy League universities, complain that his show is little more than an hour-long infomercial for weight-loss fads like green coffee bean extract. (The Federal Trade Commission has sued the company that hawks this dubious product.) A spokesman for the Center for Inquiry accused him of selling “snake oil.” In June, a Senate subcommittee took him to task for telling his viewers (who number 2.9 million on any given day) things like: “I’ve got the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. It’s raspberry ketones.”​
A large group of physicians, pharmacists and other researchers from Canada had their own questions about programs like “The Dr. Oz Show.” So they set out to see whether the “skepticism and criticism from medical professionals” was warranted.​
The Canadians focused on “The Dr. Oz Show” and “The Doctors,” another daily talk show that averages 2.3 million viewers per day. After watching two episodes of each program, they hypothesized that only half of the claims made on the shows could be supported with actual evidence. They also calculated that they would need to review 158 specific recommendations to see whether their hypothesis was correct.​
Lucky for them, the shows are rife with recommendations -- 12 in a typical episode of “The Dr. Oz Show” and 11 in an episode of “The Doctors.” So members of the research team watched 40 episodes of each show, which were randomly selected among all the episodes that aired in the first five months of 2013.​
They found that 32% of the 479 recommendations made on “The Dr. Oz Show,” either by the host or his guests, fell under the heading of “general medical advice.” Another 25% of the claims were about diet (i.e., foods that boost the immune system) and 18% were about weight loss.​
Among all of these recommendations, the researchers randomly selected 80 from each show and looked to see what evidence, if any, could back them up. Two team members conducted independent searches, spending up to an hour on each one. “In an attempt to be as fair as possible” to the shows, they wrote, they “used a relatively broad definition of support.”​
And yet only 21% of the recommendations on “The Dr. Oz Show” could be supported by what the researchers considered “believable” evidence. Another 11% were supported by “somewhat believable” evidence.​
Good or so-so evidence contradicted 11% of the claims made on “Dr. Oz” and 13% of the claims made on “The Doctors.”​
The researchers also noted that for both shows combined, 40% of the recommendations mentioned a specific benefit of the intervention being touted. The size of the benefit was discussed in fewer than 20% of cases, possible harms or side effects came up less than 10% of the time, and potential conflicts of interest were mentioned in less than 1% of cases.​
Bullshit, it doesn’t harm anyone. It’s not a cure, it’s supposed to help in weight loss.
Anyone who doesn’t accept that controlling your diet and increasing activity is necessary for weight loss is kidding themselves .
If they want to waste money , we’ll it’s a free country .
Nutritional supplementation can be a bet positive but you need to know what you’re doing . And if we judged most products on hype and if the hype proves true , most would fail.
It’s why all these things have that disclaimer about in conjunction with an exercise program etc.
Either way , he didn’t live off mommy and daddy well into his 40s. 🙄
 

LionDeNittany

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
45,854
20,611
1
DFW, TX
Selling fake medical "cures" does harm people. Spreading false medical information does harm people. And he did it all to make money.

What do real-world doctors have to say about the advice dispensed on “The Dr. Oz Show”? Less than one-third of it can be backed up by even modest medical evidence.​
If that sounds alarming, consider this: Nearly 4 in 10 of the assertions made on the hit show appear to be made on the basis of no evidence at all.​
The researchers who took it upon themselves to fact-check Dr. Oz and his on-air guests were able to find legitimate studies related to another 11% of the recommendations made on the show. However, in these cases, the recommendations ran counter to the medical literature.​
“Consumers should be skeptical about any recommendations provided on television medical talk shows,” the researchers wrote in a study published this week in BMJ. “Viewers need to realize that the recommendations may not be supported by higher evidence or presented with enough balanced information to adequately inform decision making.”​
Critics of Dr. Mehmet Oz, an accomplished cardiac surgeon with degrees from two Ivy League universities, complain that his show is little more than an hour-long infomercial for weight-loss fads like green coffee bean extract. (The Federal Trade Commission has sued the company that hawks this dubious product.) A spokesman for the Center for Inquiry accused him of selling “snake oil.” In June, a Senate subcommittee took him to task for telling his viewers (who number 2.9 million on any given day) things like: “I’ve got the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. It’s raspberry ketones.”​
A large group of physicians, pharmacists and other researchers from Canada had their own questions about programs like “The Dr. Oz Show.” So they set out to see whether the “skepticism and criticism from medical professionals” was warranted.​
The Canadians focused on “The Dr. Oz Show” and “The Doctors,” another daily talk show that averages 2.3 million viewers per day. After watching two episodes of each program, they hypothesized that only half of the claims made on the shows could be supported with actual evidence. They also calculated that they would need to review 158 specific recommendations to see whether their hypothesis was correct.​
Lucky for them, the shows are rife with recommendations -- 12 in a typical episode of “The Dr. Oz Show” and 11 in an episode of “The Doctors.” So members of the research team watched 40 episodes of each show, which were randomly selected among all the episodes that aired in the first five months of 2013.​
They found that 32% of the 479 recommendations made on “The Dr. Oz Show,” either by the host or his guests, fell under the heading of “general medical advice.” Another 25% of the claims were about diet (i.e., foods that boost the immune system) and 18% were about weight loss.​
Among all of these recommendations, the researchers randomly selected 80 from each show and looked to see what evidence, if any, could back them up. Two team members conducted independent searches, spending up to an hour on each one. “In an attempt to be as fair as possible” to the shows, they wrote, they “used a relatively broad definition of support.”​
And yet only 21% of the recommendations on “The Dr. Oz Show” could be supported by what the researchers considered “believable” evidence. Another 11% were supported by “somewhat believable” evidence.​
Good or so-so evidence contradicted 11% of the claims made on “Dr. Oz” and 13% of the claims made on “The Doctors.”​
The researchers also noted that for both shows combined, 40% of the recommendations mentioned a specific benefit of the intervention being touted. The size of the benefit was discussed in fewer than 20% of cases, possible harms or side effects came up less than 10% of the time, and potential conflicts of interest were mentioned in less than 1% of cases.​

LOL. Man you are losing it.
 

rumble_lion

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2011
22,616
5,461
1
Bullshit, it doesn’t harm anyone. It’s not a cure, it’s supposed to help in weight loss.
Anyone who doesn’t accept that controlling your diet and increasing activity is necessary for weight loss is kidding themselves .
If they want to waste money , we’ll it’s a free country .
Nutritional supplementation can be a bet positive but you need to know what you’re doing . And if we judged most products on hype and if the hype proves true , most would fail.
It’s why all these things have that disclaimer about in conjunction with an exercise program etc.
Either way , he didn’t live off mommy and daddy well into his 40s. 🙄

Anyone who doesn’t accept that controlling your diet and increasing activity is necessary for weight loss is kidding themselves .

So you are admitting that dr. Oz is a quack? Cool.

If they want to waste money , we’ll it’s a free country .

So everyone is free to sell fraudulent products? That's not really a "freedom" now is it?
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
24,260
27,924
1
An altered state
Selling fake medical "cures" does harm people. Spreading false medical information does harm people. And he did it all to make money.

What do real-world doctors have to say about the advice dispensed on “The Dr. Oz Show”? Less than one-third of it can be backed up by even modest medical evidence.​
If that sounds alarming, consider this: Nearly 4 in 10 of the assertions made on the hit show appear to be made on the basis of no evidence at all.​
The researchers who took it upon themselves to fact-check Dr. Oz and his on-air guests were able to find legitimate studies related to another 11% of the recommendations made on the show. However, in these cases, the recommendations ran counter to the medical literature.​
“Consumers should be skeptical about any recommendations provided on television medical talk shows,” the researchers wrote in a study published this week in BMJ. “Viewers need to realize that the recommendations may not be supported by higher evidence or presented with enough balanced information to adequately inform decision making.”​
Critics of Dr. Mehmet Oz, an accomplished cardiac surgeon with degrees from two Ivy League universities, complain that his show is little more than an hour-long infomercial for weight-loss fads like green coffee bean extract. (The Federal Trade Commission has sued the company that hawks this dubious product.) A spokesman for the Center for Inquiry accused him of selling “snake oil.” In June, a Senate subcommittee took him to task for telling his viewers (who number 2.9 million on any given day) things like: “I’ve got the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat. It’s raspberry ketones.”​
A large group of physicians, pharmacists and other researchers from Canada had their own questions about programs like “The Dr. Oz Show.” So they set out to see whether the “skepticism and criticism from medical professionals” was warranted.​
The Canadians focused on “The Dr. Oz Show” and “The Doctors,” another daily talk show that averages 2.3 million viewers per day. After watching two episodes of each program, they hypothesized that only half of the claims made on the shows could be supported with actual evidence. They also calculated that they would need to review 158 specific recommendations to see whether their hypothesis was correct.​
Lucky for them, the shows are rife with recommendations -- 12 in a typical episode of “The Dr. Oz Show” and 11 in an episode of “The Doctors.” So members of the research team watched 40 episodes of each show, which were randomly selected among all the episodes that aired in the first five months of 2013.​
They found that 32% of the 479 recommendations made on “The Dr. Oz Show,” either by the host or his guests, fell under the heading of “general medical advice.” Another 25% of the claims were about diet (i.e., foods that boost the immune system) and 18% were about weight loss.​
Among all of these recommendations, the researchers randomly selected 80 from each show and looked to see what evidence, if any, could back them up. Two team members conducted independent searches, spending up to an hour on each one. “In an attempt to be as fair as possible” to the shows, they wrote, they “used a relatively broad definition of support.”​
And yet only 21% of the recommendations on “The Dr. Oz Show” could be supported by what the researchers considered “believable” evidence. Another 11% were supported by “somewhat believable” evidence.​
Good or so-so evidence contradicted 11% of the claims made on “Dr. Oz” and 13% of the claims made on “The Doctors.”​
The researchers also noted that for both shows combined, 40% of the recommendations mentioned a specific benefit of the intervention being touted. The size of the benefit was discussed in fewer than 20% of cases, possible harms or side effects came up less than 10% of the time, and potential conflicts of interest were mentioned in less than 1% of cases.​
You mean like how 🤡’s are pushing wind and solar that is less than 40% successful? All while getting massive donations and support from that industry?
 

psuted

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 26, 2010
27,656
23,130
1
Anyone who doesn’t accept that controlling your diet and increasing activity is necessary for weight loss is kidding themselves .

So you are admitting that dr. Oz is a quack? Cool.

If they want to waste money , we’ll it’s a free country .

So everyone is free to sell fraudulent products? That's not really a "freedom" now is it?
Hell, the Democrats sell “fraudulent products and policy” all the time using dishonest and mislabeled legislation full of highly partisan and wasteful pork but masquerading as bills that deceitfully help people, when all they do is to hurt American citizens and enrich themselves and their friends using tax payer dollars to do so. That’s not really a “freedom” now is it?
 
Last edited:

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,669
25,188
1
Hell, the Democrats sell “fraudulent products and policy” all the time using dishonest and mislabeled legislation full of highly partisan and wasteful pork but masquerading as bills that deceitfully help people, when all they do is to hurt American citizens and enrich themselves and their friends using tax payer dollars to do so. That’s not really a “freedom” now is it?
How many industries use hype and make dubious claims? Let’s take the cosmetics industry . The soft drink industry doesn’t come out and say you’ll get diabetes with too much of this crap.
They sell fun, same as beer. He’s just another dummy thinking he’s making a point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13 and psuted

psuted

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Nov 26, 2010
27,656
23,130
1
How many industries use hype and make dubious claims? Let’s take the cosmetics industry . The soft drink industry doesn’t come out and say you’ll get diabetes with too much of this crap.
They sell fun, same as beer. He’s just another dummy thinking he’s making a point.

I don’t especially think Dr. Oz is the best candidate, but he’s certainly better than a Socialist that never had a real job in his life and has had an unremarkable career in politics. Casey is already an empty suit disaster in Pa., but I didn’t think Pa could do worse than Casey, until this clown came around.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,669
25,188
1
I don’t especially think Dr. Oz is the best candidate, but he’s certainly better than a Socialist that never had a real job in his life and has had an unremarkable career in politics. Casey is already an empty suit disaster in Pa., but I didn’t think Pa could do worse than Casey, until this clown came around.
Exactly, we don't a Brennan Huff or Dale Dobash as a senator ( step Brothers reference).
 
  • Like
Reactions: brupsu and psuted

brupsu

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2003
3,993
1,639
1
Which proves that capitalism is a failure. People should be allowed to pursue happiness without being forced to work and produce things. The government should support them. It's in the constitution.
The pursuit of whatever makes you happy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

fbh1

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 17, 2002
1,723
727
1
74
Bellefonte, PA
Trump built things and employed people. Pretty much the opposite of most politicians.
What do Trump Steaks, Go Trump, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, Trump Mortgage Co., Trump: The Game, Trump Magazine, Trump University, Trump Ice, The New Jersey Generals, Tour de Trump, Trump Network, Trumped... all have in common? They are all failed Trump business ventures. Trump companies that actually sought bankruptcy protection include... Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, Trump Plaza Casinos, Trump Plaza Hotel, Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts, Trump Entertainment Resorts.

Trump has not been the business Guru that his base wants to envision. Some of those misguided ventures like Trump University actually hurt a lot of very trusting customers. He has found ways to profit through other ventures... but contrary to his followers opinions, not everything Trump has undertaken has been a success. If he hadn't been able to cash in on his family's already sizable wealth, who knows what he might be doing today. He probably could have made a living selling used cars....
 
  • Like
Reactions: rumble_lion

LioninHouston

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Dec 12, 2005
26,824
40,532
1
What do Trump Steaks, Go Trump, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, Trump Mortgage Co., Trump: The Game, Trump Magazine, Trump University, Trump Ice, The New Jersey Generals, Tour de Trump, Trump Network, Trumped... all have in common? They are all failed Trump business ventures. Trump companies that actually sought bankruptcy protection include... Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, Trump Plaza Casinos, Trump Plaza Hotel, Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts, Trump Entertainment Resorts.

Trump has not been the business Guru that his base wants to envision. Some of those misguided ventures like Trump University actually hurt a lot of very trusting customers. He has found ways to profit through other ventures... but contrary to his followers opinions, not everything Trump has undertaken has been a success. If he hadn't been able to cash in on his family's already sizable wealth, who knows what he might be doing today. He probably could have made a living selling used cars....
Trump builds things and employs people. Pretty much the opposite of most politicians.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,669
25,188
1
Trump builds things and employs people. Pretty much the opposite of most politicians.
What do Trump Steaks, Go Trump, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, Trump Mortgage Co., Trump: The Game, Trump Magazine, Trump University, Trump Ice, The New Jersey Generals, Tour de Trump, Trump Network, Trumped... all have in common? They are all failed Trump business ventures. Trump companies that actually sought bankruptcy protection include... Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, Trump Plaza Casinos, Trump Plaza Hotel, Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts, Trump Entertainment Resorts.

Trump has not been the business Guru that his base wants to envision. Some of those misguided ventures like Trump University actually hurt a lot of very trusting customers. He has found ways to profit through other ventures... but contrary to his followers opinions, not everything Trump has undertaken has been a success. If he hadn't been able to cash in on his family's already sizable wealth, who knows what he might be doing today. He probably could have made a living selling used cars....
Yeah…no, he’s been wildly successful, with all the actual businesses he has owned , some will fail. It happens . He happened to beat a bunch of seasoned politicians and win the presidency. And wtf does that have to do with Fetterman never working a real job?
 

The Spin Meister

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2012
24,260
27,924
1
An altered state
What do Trump Steaks, Go Trump, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, Trump Mortgage Co., Trump: The Game, Trump Magazine, Trump University, Trump Ice, The New Jersey Generals, Tour de Trump, Trump Network, Trumped... all have in common? They are all failed Trump business ventures. Trump companies that actually sought bankruptcy protection include... Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, Trump Plaza Casinos, Trump Plaza Hotel, Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts, Trump Entertainment Resorts.

Trump has not been the business Guru that his base wants to envision. Some of those misguided ventures like Trump University actually hurt a lot of very trusting customers. He has found ways to profit through other ventures... but contrary to his followers opinions, not everything Trump has undertaken has been a success. If he hadn't been able to cash in on his family's already sizable wealth, who knows what he might be doing today. He probably could have made a living selling used cars....
Most of those were just licensing deals for the use of his name in which he had no management involvement. And the casinos and motels in Atlantic City got hammered when gambling was legalized just about everywhere.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,669
25,188
1
Another prize winning post from bourbon who never actually deals with the facts...
Neither did you , you were very dishonest in your post , spin Meister pointed out why when he mentioned the licensing deals and staying how legalized gambling in nearby states hurt the Atlantic City casinos.
I’ll add that while Trump’s dad did give him a start , Trump greatly increased his wealth from that point by his own efforts .
Also, Fetterman is the candidate , Trump isn’t. Which leads me to say you don’t grape what a fact is drama Queen.
 

fbh1

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 17, 2002
1,723
727
1
74
Bellefonte, PA
Neither did you , you were very dishonest in your post , spin Meister pointed out why when he mentioned the licensing deals and staying how legalized gambling in nearby states hurt the Atlantic City casinos.
I’ll add that while Trump’s dad did give him a start , Trump greatly increased his wealth from that point by his own efforts .
Also, Fetterman is the candidate , Trump isn’t. Which leads me to say you don’t grape what a fact is drama Queen.
"Which leads me to say you don’t grape what a fact is drama Queen"... what the heck does that mean? Another intelligent post from bourbon. I can't wait to see your next post....
 

RoyalT12

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2020
5,738
4,423
1
Just heard that the Inky hit Fetterman really hard this week but it is behind a pay wall. Anyone have it?

Supposedly said that Fetterman is the son of a wealthy family and lived off their largess. They supported him until he was in his forties. And that he didn’t pay his taxes on much of small income he had.

If true, Oz will use this like Thor’s hammer. This is gonna be fun.
Just checking in, how’s this bomb shell trending?
 

brupsu

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2003
3,993
1,639
1
What do Trump Steaks, Go Trump, Trump Airlines, Trump Vodka, Trump Mortgage Co., Trump: The Game, Trump Magazine, Trump University, Trump Ice, The New Jersey Generals, Tour de Trump, Trump Network, Trumped... all have in common? They are all failed Trump business ventures. Trump companies that actually sought bankruptcy protection include... Trump Taj Mahal, Trump Castle, Trump Plaza Casinos, Trump Plaza Hotel, Trump Hotels and Casinos Resorts, Trump Entertainment Resorts.

Trump has not been the business Guru that his base wants to envision. Some of those misguided ventures like Trump University actually hurt a lot of very trusting customers. He has found ways to profit through other ventures... but contrary to his followers opinions, not everything Trump has undertaken has been a success. If he hadn't been able to cash in on his family's already sizable wealth, who knows what he might be doing today. He probably could have made a living selling used cars....
So what’s the matter with used car guys.Rudy washington carver will be right over to allow you to purchase one of his saaaaaaaaawwweeeeee rides.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bourbon n blues