638
all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] flossdaily@lemmy.world 179 points 3 years ago

Forbes has never attempted to verify this list anyway. It's all self-reporting, and it's well established that Trump lied to get on the list.

The guy is such an embarrassment that he even pretended to be his own assistant, calling people to tell him how great he was.

And they recognized his voice. They knew it was this loser pretending to be his own assistant.

Think how sad that is, for a guy who legitimately could have just hired a PR person to do this.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 17 points 3 years ago

John Barron?

I honestly think every single media outlet should bring that up in any given article on him: "Donnie, AKA 'John Barron', .... yadda yadda..."

[-] GratefullyGodless@lemmy.world 1 points 3 years ago

Yeah, but it was a simple explanation, his kid with Melania is named Baron, so obviously he brought his kid into the family business before he was even conceived.

[-] BeardyGrumps@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 years ago

To be fair I pretend to be my own secretary when answering cold callers.. I urge others to do the same. You can get them running round in loops..

[-] microphone900@lemmy.ml 11 points 3 years ago

Why do I have a memory of him doing this early on in his presidency? Like, I hazily remember a call to a reporter threatening war with North Korea and then the Pentagon saying 'We don't know who called, they don't represent us, it's all bullshit.' Did I dream that up or did it get lost in all the stuff he got into over 4 years?

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 5 points 3 years ago

New Mandela Effect? I remember it too.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 99 points 3 years ago

He lied his way onto the original list in 1982, by telling a reporter he had more of his father’s fortune in his own name than was actually the case.

[-] Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de 58 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

I don't care about lists of wealth hoarders, I want a list of all the people who have lost gross amounts of wealth and why. And lets start with a list but try to keep expanding it until its a pamphlet, or a book, or a tome.

edit: corrected typo

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 34 points 3 years ago
[-] rthmchgs@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

His supporters don't. They'll say it was liberal persecution or some such bullshit.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 24 points 3 years ago

You just wait, he'll bitch and moan about this at his next rally. This sort of thing seriously pisses him off.

[-] Naja_kaouthia@sh.itjust.works 8 points 3 years ago

Does Vegas have odds yet for him calling it fake news?

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 9 points 3 years ago

It's nearly a guarante so they don't take lines of that sort anymore.

[-] Overzeetop@kbin.social 6 points 3 years ago

people who have lost gross amounts of wealth and why

I would like to start a list with the "why" filled in as "beheading" and just begin populating it from the top down.

[-] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de 5 points 3 years ago

Good idea. People remember Theranos but Elizabeth Holmes might not even make the top 100.

[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 5 points 3 years ago

I want a list of the wealthiest and how they came into their wealth. Why? Because that way I know who to keep an eye out for. :)

Also, I'm less pissed off at people who inherit wealth than the ones who horde it. Someone who inherits billions and then doesn't use it isn't nearly as bad as someone who has billions because they crushed everyone else under their heel. The former didn't ask to be born into that life, but the latter sought it out. That doesn't mean the former is blameless, but they're not necessarily evil like the latter.

[-] LarryTheMatador@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)
[-] Syrc@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago

In a just world the “wealthy” would have at most 100 times the wealth of the poorest person on earth, and it would barely matter.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 56 points 3 years ago

How the hell was he on there in the first place?

[-] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 69 points 3 years ago

Fraud, mostly.

[-] ForestOrca@kbin.social 48 points 3 years ago

Fraud, as we're about to see in the NY case.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 34 points 3 years ago

He's about to have his Trump Org business assets liquidated by a court-appointed Receiver vis-a-vis the NY fraud case he just lost, so unless he can grift enough money from his base off of the residual soundbites and manufactured outrage (unlikely), he's not coming anywhere near that list again.

He could potentially make millions of his grift, but I don't think billions. He's not getting back on that list.

[-] lingh0e@lemmy.film 27 points 3 years ago

I feel like this probably hits him harder than the prospect of jail.

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 2 points 3 years ago

Good, let his empire of lies collapse and let those that have been grifted by supporting him either realize their mistake or just get angry and we can laugh at them for being idiots

[-] cahhts@lemmy.world 20 points 3 years ago

Fuck this guy

[-] erased_tapes@lemmy.world 18 points 3 years ago

Ya know, if we all stop talking about him, he might eventually go away.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 years ago

We tried that for a while (the entire early 2000s), and it didn’t work.

We need to ruthlessly ridicule him and anyone who supports him. Embarrassment seems to be the only thing that works. It takes more than normal to embarrass him, but it does work. See: Stormy Daniels mushroom analogy. One of the only things he shut up about.

[-] finkrat@lemmy.world 10 points 3 years ago

Beginning of the end? Where's my popcorn

[-] Surp@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago
this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2023
638 points (97.3% liked)

politics

31511 readers
2586 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS