American Politics

[PVMonger]

I am looking forward to seeing if Ivanka throws her Dad under the bus to save herself.

They gave her a very long letter hinting at what the committee knows she witnessed and wrote they want to confirm what she said (according to reports of others).

Assuming that Ivanka actually testifies, here's how the testimony will go:

Committee: "Is your name Ivanka Trump?

Ivanka: "I refuse to answer that question and I assert my 5th Amendment rights. "

Committee: "Is Donald J. Trump your father?

Ivanka: "I refuse to answer that question and I assert my 5th Amendment rights. "

Committee: "Were you in the White House on January 6th, 2021?

Ivanka: "I refuse to answer that question and I assert my 5th Amendment rights. "

Committee: asking questions 4 - ?

Ivanka: "I refuse to answer that question and I assert my 5th Amendment rights. "

We all need to remember that the one-term, twice-impeached orange clown said that only the mob uses the 5th Amendment and it makes them look guilty. Right, Canada?

[Canada]

As measured by the usual Wall Street and stock market investment industry standard S&P 500 Index, the market is currently down about 8.7% from its all-time record high close.

I wonder if we will finally hit at least one legitimate "Correction" level sometime soon. Which would be perfectly normal and, frankly, welcome after we've had some 70 all-time record high closes in just Biden's first year in office.

Oh, according to the 30 stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, we're currently down 7. 2%, which is even further away from a useful, health-restoring "Correction" in the market.

BTW, was that where you got that "1500 points" number?

Well, if we're simply calculating from the first of this year, your way, the market is only down 3. 2% in the Dow and 7. 7% in the S&P, neither of which is nearly as terrifying as you presumably meant it to sound.

But I can't think of a very good reason to start calculating the rise or decline in the market starting from January 1 instead of from its recent all-time record closing high or low as would be done by anyone with as much instructive knowledge about the stock market as you purport to have..

The Dow is down 2100 points and 5.7% YTD. Please stop posting false numbers. It appears your only posts try to make Biden look better than the failure he is. With Biden trying to implement his policies this could get much worse. Fortunately there still are some smart democrats in congress keeping Biden disasters to a minimum.

[Canada]

I am looking forward to seeing if Ivanka throws her Dad under the bus to save herself.

They gave her a very long letter hinting at what the committee knows she witnessed and wrote they want to confirm what she said (according to reports of others).

There isn't going to be anyone thrown under the bus. There is nothing criminal here and history will prove it. A year from now nothing will have happened on this issue and you guys will still be talking about it still trying to distract from Biden destroying America. This is another democrat witch hunt distraction trying to get the attention off of Biden failures.

[Axel Heyst]

Politics should not be all black and white. Trump is evil. Biden is good. Therefore when a liberal or conservative speaks to truth it should be noted.

https://youtu.be/8bQ2rctogOs

[EihTooms]

"Presided over?" Don't let Tooms frame the argument by selling you loaded terms. A number of Democratic presidents "presided over" recessions including Wilson, Truman, and Carter. Heck he even tries to blame Lincoln for the Civil War because he was a Republican, when there was nothing he could do otherwise besides let the southern states go. Tooms is a partisan hack loudly working day and month out with a false dichotomy, Democrats all good, Republicans all bad even stretching back to the Civil War. It's absurd, and betrays someone familiar with hack internet sources as opposed to history. I hate to agree with Elvis (Elvira) but he has him pegged on this one, though he is just as idiotic from the other angle.

BTW, Eisenhower's 3 Recessions, the third one beginning in 1960, however mild and unnoticed by you, accompanied one of the most "atrocious" jobs growth records of all time for any president. Which was not the case for either of the presidents in office in 1945 and post-WWII 1948. And most definitely not the case for the historically brief one that began under Carter, who was saddled with huge inflation challenges.

See, the term "presided over" is extremely useful in assessing what a POTUS does in response to Recessionary conditions. So we not only need to mark when 13 of the 17 Recessions of the past 100 years began, sorry Woodrow, but what did or didn't the POTUS do about it.

Clearly, the WWII, post-WWII and high unemployment rate plus "Long National Nightmare" conditions Carter inherited from Nixon / Ford along with the rising inflation problem were far more challenging than anything in the economy facing Eisenhower in 1953.

History then shows in addition to the 3 Recessions that began on his watch, he "presided" over one of the lowest and most "atriocious" 8 year average annual jobs growth percetages ever.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs...idential_terms

[EihTooms]

Market is down 1500 points already this year. This must be the great democrat crash that you guys keep talking about.

Unfit for president because he Has Dementia!

As measured by the usual Wall Street and stock market investment industry standard S&P 500 Index, the market is currently down about 8.7% from its all-time record high close.

I wonder if we will finally hit at least one legitimate "Correction" level sometime soon. Which would be perfectly normal and, frankly, welcome after we've had some 70 all-time record high closes in just Biden's first year in office.

Oh, according to the 30 stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, we're currently down 7. 2%, which is even further away from a useful, health-restoring "Correction" in the market.

BTW, was that where you got that "1500 points" number?

Well, if we're simply calculating from the first of this year, your way, the market is only down 3. 2% in the Dow and 7. 7% in the S&P, neither of which is nearly as terrifying as you presumably meant it to sound.

But I can't think of a very good reason to start calculating the rise or decline in the market starting from January 1 instead of from its recent all-time record closing high or low as would be done by anyone with as much instructive knowledge about the stock market as you purport to have.

What was your reasoning for doing it that way?

Well, actually, talking about these things in terms of "points" instead of percentages isn't very useful anyway. Particularly when we're talking about a market that has been growing in points for many, many decades.

You know how that works, right? For example, a market decline of, say, "3 points" from an all-time record high close of 6 points in an Index is much, much scarier and worse than a decline of 3,000 points in an Index that reached an all-time record high close of 36,952.

See what I mean? Just sayin'.

[PVMonger]

Market is down 1500 points already this year. This must be the great democrat crash that you guys keep talking about.

Unfit for president because he Has Dementia!

Biden has dementia? The great Dr. Canada speaks. Of course he can't provide anybody with a copy of his MD or anything else. I wonder why that is? Probably because "everybody knows" (which is his nonsensical answer to virtually everything).

[ScatManDoo]

There is nothing there. Nothing will happen to Trump on the January 6 protest and you will still be talking about it next year while Biden destroys America.

I am looking forward to seeing if Ivanka throws her Dad under the bus to save herself.

They gave her a very long letter hinting at what the committee knows she witnessed and wrote they want to confirm what she said (according to reports of others).

[Paulie97]

"Presided over?" Don't let Tooms frame the argument by selling you loaded terms. A number of Democratic presidents "presided over" recessions including Wilson, Truman, and Carter. Heck he even tries to blame Lincoln for the Civil War because he was a Republican, when there was nothing he could do otherwise besides let the southern states go. Tooms is a partisan hack loudly working day and month out with a false dichotomy, Democrats all good, Republicans all bad even stretching back to the Civil War. It's absurd, and betrays someone familiar with hack internet sources as opposed to history. I hate to agree with Elvis (Elvira) but he has him pegged on this one, though he is just as idiotic from the other angle.

[EihTooms]

Of course, as recessions often follow wars. Yet the same benefit of the doubt isn't given to Dwight after the end of the Korean War. Instead we get all the hubris "atrocious, etc." You are pretty much in the same vein as Canada and his various other names, but from the other side. And it's rather irrelevant as the audience is rather small, a sex forum, and in a thread tucked away where few know about it.

You consider Eisenhower's 3 Recessions, the third one beginning in 1960, to be the result of the USA retooling and resetting in the aftermath of the Korean War in any way similar to the way we did for WWII?

You further assert that I listed any of Eisenhower's 3 Recessions in his 8 years in office among the half dozen or so Great Repub Recessions of the past 100 years?

And you conjured up all that in order to "Bothsider" me pretty much the same as someone who claims there were no Recessions and no Bear Market Crashes under any Repub in the past 50 years, nor has Biden's policies created any jobs but Trump's economic decisions and results were much better.

Uh. Ok.

I submit this to the court as Exhibit A for how "Bothsiderism" exists solely to help the utterly wrongheaded look like a reasonable option, perhaps worth no less consideration than a coin flip in a voting booth, inevitably giving them at least a 50-50 shot at producing more of their patented disastrous results.

[Canada]

The January 6th insurrection investigative committee got great news from the Supreme Court yesterday.

They told TrumpShit NO NO NO to his lame claim of executive privilege as he tries to hide his seditious behavior that got into the record.

Hundreds of pages from the archives were delivered the same day after the SCOTUS 8-1 decision. (Proving once again that Clarence Thomas is a legal lightweight).

But the bipartisan investigative committee has enough already.

They have interviewed dozens of lower level White House staffers that have already testified to the committee as to what was said and done.

It does not matter if the higher level folks try to be silent.

Liz Cheney & the other committee members already have the goods on what went down, and it was criminal.

Donald Trump is a criminal and he belongs in jail.

There is nothing there. Nothing will happen to Trump on the January 6 protest and you will still be talking about it next year while Biden destroys America.

[Canada]

And what makes it a fairytale?

EihTooms not only provided the data but also the link so you could verify his statement.

If you disagree with his statement or the source, the grown-up response would be to explain why.

You could insist, for example, that the OP was incorrect and there haven't been 17 recessions presided over by the Republicans.

Of course, as a grown-up, you would be expected to substantiate your rebuttal with a coherent and persuading argument. Calling it a fairytale is not it.

Are you a grown-up, Mr. Canada?.

Market is down 1500 points already this year. This must be the great democrat crash that you guys keep talking about.

Unfit for president because he Has Dementia!

[ScatManDoo]

The January 6th insurrection investigative committee got great news from the Supreme Court yesterday.

They told TrumpShit NO NO NO to his lame claim of executive privilege as he tries to hide his seditious behavior that got into the record.

Hundreds of pages from the archives were delivered the same day after the SCOTUS 8-1 decision. (Proving once again that Clarence Thomas is a legal lightweight).

But the bipartisan investigative committee has enough already.

They have interviewed dozens of lower level White House staffers that have already testified to the committee as to what was said and done.

It does not matter if the higher level folks try to be silent.

Liz Cheney & the other committee members already have the goods on what went down, and it was criminal.

Donald Trump is a criminal and he belongs in jail.

[ScatManDoo]

...I'd like to ask every right-winger here who watched that 2-hour press-conference personally. What specific answers convinced you he's unfit for president? That is if you actually watched the event and not the commentaries from your favorite lunatic TV pundits.

Anyone want to chime in?

Of course, the peanut gallery is silent.

[Xpartan]

Here is what I know about economic contractions / Recessions relative to Party affiliation stewardship as fully substantiated by the National Bureau of Economic Research in the link I provided:

There have been 17 Recessions in the USA economy over the past 100 years.

All but 4 of them began under Republican Party economic stewardship in the White House.

All of the half dozen or so of the deepest and most damaging to employment numbers Recessions began under Republicans.

And that concludes fairytale story time today. Keep up the fiction.

And what makes it a fairytale?

EihTooms not only provided the data but also the link so you could verify his statement.

If you disagree with his statement or the source, the grown-up response would be to explain why.

You could insist, for example, that the OP was incorrect and there haven't been 17 recessions presided over by the Republicans.

Of course, as a grown-up, you would be expected to substantiate your rebuttal with a coherent and persuading argument. Calling it a fairytale is not it.

Are you a grown-up, Mr. Canada?

I'd like to ask every right-winger here who watched that 2-hour press-conference personally. What specific answers convinced you he's unfit for president? That is if you actually watched the event and not the commentaries from your favorite lunatic TV pundits.

Yes unfit to lead. First stage of Alzheimer's and delusional. Pretty obvious to most Americans.

Are you a psychiatrist? Should we start addressing you Dr. Canada? You seem to be able to diagnose a mental illness on TV.

And yet, you don't seem to be able to distinguish a yes / no question from a WH question. Here, allow me to help.

My question was: "What specific answers convinced you he's unfit for president"?

What do you say? Try again?