American Politics

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2791711]Why is HIV so prevalent in hetero males in Africa?

Poverty is the prime reason IMHO. When you're poor, you don't spend money on condoms. When you're poor, you don't spend money on anti-viral treatments. Additionally, if the women involved in the issue don't demand that the man wear a condom, she can become infected. And then she passes the infection on.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2791805]Sub-Saharan Africans have a higher level of sexuality. Banging is just normal and expected behavior for them. Their women don't get headaches, and they don't often play dumb mind games like western women do. That's why it's a fun place to visit!

But it obviously does mean there are higher rates of STDs. So stock up on rubbers and prep beforehand.[/QUOTE]Excellent points gentlemen. Just really excellent points. (I'm trying to get Tooms to change my nickname from "Good Points Tiny" to "Excellent Points Tiny.")

Since I started wearing condoms religiously, I haven't been reading up on HIV in third world countries. The old explanations were that ulcers on ones penis and STD's like herpes, chlamydia and gonorrhea made people more susceptible to HIV infection. And there were more untreated STD's in Africa. Another explanation was that there was some kind of variant of the virus in Africa that was more infectious. But honestly your explanations make more sense to me.

I'll add one, a variation on what PVMonger said. If you don't have enough money for condoms, maybe anal sex is more common, for birth control. I don't know if that's necessarily a good theory for heterosexual men who are the givers and not the receivers. It could help explain higher rates among women though.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2791492] And, no, your flights of fancy into marathon topic-changing conversations here having virtually nothing to do with American Politics, clearly not your expertise, won't distract or misdirect anyone from that uncomfortable truth either.[/QUOTE]

To try to keep this relevant to American Politics, I believe like illiteracy, poverty, and crime, AIDS is more common among Democrats.

Just kidding! And even now that it's not a death sentence, I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2791837]
To try to keep this relevant to American Politics, I believe like illiteracy, poverty, and crime, AIDS is more common among Democrats.
[/QUOTE]Poverty is the root cause. Partly leading to low condom use, poor education, but also importantly poor diet and therefore compromised immune system.

Poverty also causes husbands to go work away from home in mines. They stay away from home for months on end, in 'barrack' like accommodation on site. When they are away from home for so long, they tend to use local hookers that service the mines. Since polygamy is common place, a guy can get infected in the big cities, then take it back to his brood of wives, and infect them all.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2791872]Poverty is the root cause. Partly leading to low condom use, poor education, but also importantly poor diet and therefore compromised immune system.

Poverty also causes husbands to go work away from home in mines. They stay away from home for months on end, in 'barrack' like accommodation on site. When they are away from home for so long, they tend to use local hookers that service the mines. Since polygamy is common place, a guy can get infected in the big cities, then take it back to his brood of wives, and infect them all.[/QUOTE]A third excellent post on this subject. I think the ISG Brain Trust has a better handle on the spread of HIV in Africa than the UN and WHO. Seriously. Thanks for an enlightening discussion gentlemen.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2791819]Yet again the point has gone flying over your tiny NPC mind.

Someone from the Trump administration asked Twitter to take down a hateful insult directed toward the President of the United States. Twitter refused. The End.

They didn't attempt to "make it illegal". They didn't collaborate with twitter, the FBI and the rest of the deep state. They simply pointed out that Twitter deleted a huge amount of what it called "hateful" insulting tweets, so would they consider doing it here. Twitter didn't, as was their right, and nothing more happened.

Compare that to the Hunter Biden laptop.

Here we have a vast trove of information detailing corruption in the Biden Crime Family, just weeks before an election.

Where Twitter had refused to remove the anti-Trump tweet, they now did the opposite for Biden. They (and other Big Tech) completely censored and blocked all mention of the laptop, to the point of suspending the account of the New York Post among others.

See the difference? Refuse to remove a hateful anti-Trump tweet, but ferociously block and censor important information about Biden corruption and criminality..[/QUOTE]You missed the point. Period.

You complain about censorship and Donnie the Dumbass did exactly that. He or someone in his administration asked Twitter to remove a post he didn't like.

That's [B]censorship[/B].

You didn't know that, of course, because FUX Snooze didn't report it. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. What it means is that FUX Snooze [B]didn't want you to know[/B].

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2791563]Interesting link, thanks. It looks like only about 2500 heterosexual males in the USA came down with HIV in 2019. That's not very many. And that number may be high as I imagine some men may have lied about their sexual preferences.[/QUOTE]The way that number was created was just by asking men. The idea behind it is why would they lie, but two of the most common things people are going to lie about is if they are gay or do drugs.

Studies showed the rate of transmission for heterosexual transmission was one in half a million to zero. So now Xpartan is creating a straw man (I wish you guys would not quote him LOL). I said when the rates of transmission are that low guys should not worry about HIV now with normal sex, especially given its current prognosis. In making that statement, Xpartan has no clue with regards to the prognosis with HIV, no clue what the rate of latex allergies is, and no clue as to how quickly a latex allergy can take your life. But he swears he is on a mission of safety when the truth is he is an uneducated dumb ass who puts people at greater health risk if he is listened to. Unsurprisingly, he swallowed up all the government's Covid crap too.

Using condoms for pregnancy prevention is rational. Using condoms for HIV protection is just stupid if you really know what the risks and benefits are. Again, we all know nothing is likely to happen with condom use, but latex allergies are surprisingly common and cause itching and rashes. And in some people, you can go from a rash to full blown anaphylaxis with each subsequent use of a condom.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2791563]Do you have any idea why the number of heterosexual males in Africa infected with HIV is so much higher? I'm wondering if there's something going on health wise that could account for it. Or alternately maybe there's a bigger stigma associated with being gay in Africa, so people won't admit to it. I suspect that's less likely.[/QUOTE]It is covered in the article I linked. If you read the article I linked, granted it is long, the testing in Africa for HIV is shit, the data in various countries is so poor to the point of not being believed, and like with Covid, many deaths were shoved into the AIDS category.

The author thought people in the coffin business would be booming with the AIDS "epidemic" when in fact they were going out of business. He went to what was called ground zero for AIDS expecting to see a ghost town and saw a city where the population nearly doubled. He then looked into the business of death and thought it would be pristine and it was just as corrupt as any other enterprise.

And who was the lead actor in promoting the AIDS "epidemic"? That fucker Fauci. AIDS is real and so is Covid, but that self serving mother fucker massively exaggerated the risks of both for his own fame and financial benefit.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2791901]A third excellent post on this subject. I think the ISG Brain Trust has a better handle on the spread of HIV in Africa than the UN and WHO. Seriously. Thanks for an enlightening discussion gentlemen.[/QUOTE]No problem Tiny. Next time your in Africa give me a shout. I will give you a tour of the mines, and we can go meet some local service girls. Am sure you will be well protected in your Darth Vader suit and other redundant medications.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2791496]
China and Eastern Europe were banished from playing a regular part in the world BCOS they were left wing. So of course, they suffered.[/QUOTE]No, China's #1 trading partner in 1966 was Japan. China traded oil and coal for finished goods from Japan. Americans would buy premium products like Stoly vodka and Beluga caviar in the 1980's as well. They were not excluded from the "regular part" of the world.

And TK, I was shocked when you went to Venezuela and thought the Americans were responsible for the decline. You completely bought the Chavez bullshit. Truth is Venezuela had and may still have the world's largest oil reserves. The country was the richest in South America and should be today if they got their shit together.

Venezuela's turn to shit was because when Chavez came into office he loaded up the Venezuelan oil companies with his cronies. Oil production in Venezuela is similar to Canada, and there was a massive migration then of engineers and workers from Venezuela to Canada.

Then Chavez went back on his contract with Exxon. Exxon sued in world court and win. I expect you to say the world court is rigged in Exxon's favor, but there were Venezuelans who studied the contract and said Exxon was right to win.

And then you had the American telephone company that wired all of Venezuela, GTE. GTE was bought out by Verizon, and under Venezuelan law, Verizon was forced to pay out 50% of its profits in the form of dividends, and it did so. Thing is Verizon owned 25% of the company and got those dividends too. I was at a share holder meeting and every shareholder was screaming at management to screw over Verizon.

So what you call socialism I call theft. And what follows? Chavez dies. He steals billions and gives it to his family. They live in Florida, the great Satan nation that Chavez always griped was the reason for all of Venezuela's problems. Venezuela destroys its currency. They try crypto, then gold based currency, and no in their nation wants it, so what do they use now? The USA dollar. Now why is that TK?

And you think this was just with the USA? No, Morales and Bolivia stole the natural gas wells from Brazil. Sure, Bolivia did great in the beginning. After stealing said wells, the first thing Morales did was raise the price on the gas Brazil was paying, but production in Bolivia was stagnant for decades.

I invested a little in both nations. I made out when Chavez scared the crap out of everyone when he bought the phone company. He paid $18 a share for a company worth 5 X that. I put $1500 into Bolivia into a general mutual fund there and it went to zero. I invested in an Argentine company that was flat when the price should have gone through the roof but management was hoarding all the money through an options scheme. Meanwhile, I killed it when investing in Colombia and Chile, and which economies did the best in the twenty years since? Chile and Colombia have kicked the crap out of Argentina, Bolivia, and Venezuela.

The difference between Venezuela and Colombia was as stark as Western Europe and the old Soviet Union. Anyone going into the USSR by train could see how organized Western Europe was and what shit the USSR was. Anyone going from Venezuela to Colombia to find work? They should be. Venezuela SHOULD be a richer country.

And the first thing this socialist dickhead in Colombia said he was going to do was to quit drilling for oil. Oh brother. The best thing you can do for the environment is to get people up to $5,000 per person with regards to GDP. Only then do the poor think long term about the environment. So this socialist MF gets in there and says the first thing he is going to do is quit expanding Colombia's #1 export business and the country is instantly 20% poorer because their currency crumbles. In fact, he assures the poor stay poor because the way you get people out of poverty is clean water and cheap electricity, and he just took out Colombia's cheapest method to get cheap power.

That is the talk of the dumb shit Dems. They are going to save the planet by bankrupting the poor with "green" energy.

I grant you that Lula is socialist and his version of socialism did help Brazil, but you miss the point. When you have your "owned by workers" fantasy, that does not mean the workers own things but people who claim to be for the worker. And for every Lula, I have seen dozens of Chavez's.

There are a very precious few pols who will not be tempted to stuff their pockets while in power. Ron Paul, Rand Paul, Bernie Sanders, and even Trump do not rule for their personal gain. That is four people out of how many American pols? Hell, even Lula's hand picked successor was corrupt. For all the red-blue clashing, McConell and Pelosi have both made out like bandits while in office.

In reality, what concerns me the most is private property rights, and I see the leftists / socialists time and again having no respect for them. Doesn't "worker owned" mean stealing from those who have wealth?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2791819]Yet again the point has gone flying over your tiny NPC mind.

Someone from the Trump administration asked Twitter to take down a hateful insult directed toward the President of the United States. Twitter refused. The End.

They didn't attempt to "make it illegal". They didn't collaborate with twitter, the FBI and the rest of the deep state. They simply pointed out that Twitter deleted a huge amount of what it called "hateful" insulting tweets, so would they consider doing it here. Twitter didn't, as was their right, and nothing more happened.

Compare that to the Hunter Biden laptop.

Here we have a vast trove of information detailing corruption in the Biden Crime Family, just weeks before an election.

Where Twitter had refused to remove the anti-Trump tweet, they now did the opposite for Biden. They (and other Big Tech) completely censored and blocked all mention of the laptop, to the point of suspending the account of the New York Post among others.

See the difference? Refuse to remove a hateful anti-Trump tweet, but ferociously block and censor important information about Biden corruption and criminality.

What's worse is that it was not only the Biden campaign and democrats involved in the coverup, but also the FBI and the rest of the Washington deep state. All working in tandem with big tech and the fake news media to block information and create disinformation and fake news.

Up to 50% of people say that they would have switched their vote away from Biden had they known about the contents of the laptop. Its censorship was the clearest and most egregious election-meddling in American history.

The entire media political alphabet agency big tech wall street deep state swamp and their globohomo Agenda (best summarized as "Open Borders and Open Buttholes") is a scam and fraud against the American people. I look forward to the day it is swept away, one way or another.[/QUOTE]"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".

-The media (FOX, MSNBC, ABC, Washington Post (ie Amazon), etc).

-Social media (FB, Twitter, IG, etc).

-Business news (CNBC, FOX Business, Motley Fools, etc).

These are private businesses (not state owned) and can or can not publish whatever they wish, and are NOT related to First Amendment free speech protection. ALL Businesses are PROFIT seeking entities. Now, if you are for or against regulating businesses, then that is a debate. So if an individual such as Trump or Biden petition a business to remove a quote or story, the business entity will evaluate whether it is good for their bottom line or not.

On the value of ifs and shoulds about the past, too many times people post a lot garbage on the internet for clicks with their own agenda of gaining following, etc. Things like Hunter's laptop or that Trump is guilty as eff, etc. There's a system in place designed by our forefather, it's call the Judicial System. Bring your cases, if you have them to court, and present your evidence. Someone will judge it, and there are appeals available up to the end, with the 9 Justices to provide the final verdict.

Too many times, we get into the habit of debating sh (stuffs) that we have partial picture of. Let it play out, whether it by timeline and reportings fill out the puzzle, or by court verdicts. One thing holds true is that LIES will always get exposed in time. But we are too impatient, and want to have OUR opinion validated now. Life doesn't work that way.

-advice-.

DON'T be angry when things don't pan out the way your mind wants it.

DON'T let BUSINESSES dictate if you should be angry with a person or group because they don't share your view politically, spiritually, or otherwise.

DO enjoy the ladies that your with, and the buddies that are with you.

ENJOY everything while you can. Because in a few years, we will ALL share the same fate (Thanos).

CM.

Sub-Sahara African sexual customs and culture includes blood-letting rituals, cutting, stitching, ripping and dry sex behaviors unlike anywhere else on Earth. So much so that condoms scarcely survive the challenges even when they are worn.

Blaming "poverty" and "lack of condoms" for the almost singularly high incidence of female-to-male HIV transmission and back to female transmission in Sub-Saharan Africa ignores what many of those cultures promote sexually that, combined, will rarely if ever occur anywhere else on the planet.

I assure you it is not what happens in Thailand or any other mongering destination I have ever been.

Penis-vagina sex under conditions that exist all too often in Sub-Saharan Africa, even if using a condom, is probably more abrasive, more apt to rip and tear delicate genital skin of the pitcher and the catcher and involve more blood mixing that will directly enter the bloodstream than the way bareback anal sex is performed under ordinary and common conditions elsewhere:

[B]'Dry Sex' Is the African Sexual Health Issue No Ones Talking About.[/B]

[URL]https://www.vice.com/en/article/5gkep5/dry-sex-is-the-african-sexual-health-issue-no-ones-talking-about[/URL]

[B]Cultural practices contributing to the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus in Africa.[/B]

[URL]http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/hrdy1/[/URL]

Now, in America, the higher incidence of HIV transmission among elected male Repubs has more to do with the outcome of their wide-stance foot tapping communication with other Repub-curious men in toilet stalls.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792077]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech.[/QUOTE]My God, you are dumb. I presume you travelled abroad. Did Congress pass a law requiring you to have a Covid test when you re-entered the country? No, the executive branch made said law via a CDC recommendation. And BTW, the CDC IS a PRIVATE enterprise. Whoops.

And how about Obamacare? Oh yeah, you were required by law to purchase insurance from a PRIVATE company. Whoops.

And what body made abortion legal? Oh yeah, that would be the Supreme Court not Congress.

So the whole part about Congress making the laws has been relegated to the dust bin. So let us look at it the correct way, the parties that make and enforce laws cannot abridge freedom of speech.

Is that what happened? Damn right it did. You must be one of these dumb libs with your heads buried in the sand and have never heard of the Twitter files. A whole host of government agencies with law making and law enforcement authority were telling Twitter to shut down accounts and by far the overwhelming majority of requests were made against conservative voices.

Now let us go the other way. Twitter bans thousands of conservative accounts because of the executive branch request. Do you libs stay consistent in your views? Hell no.

A baker refused to make a cake for a gay couple, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. [URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/narrow-ruling-supreme-court-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946[/URL].

Colorado courts ruled that the state's public accommodation law, which bans discrimination by companies offering their services to the public, did not allow Phillips to refuse the gay couple's request.

Wow, so private companies cannot do whatever they want, and you are totally wrong, Checkmate.

So WTF are you saying Checkmate? Are you saying that 50 states have laws that legally allow for political discrimination by Twitter, Facebook, and other social media outlets? I would like to see said laws or are you just blowing smoke out of your ass?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792053]

Studies showed the rate of transmission for heterosexual transmission was one in half a million to zero. So now Xpartan is creating a straw man (I wish you guys would not quote him LOL). I said when the rates of transmission are that low guys should not worry about HIV now with normal sex, especially given its current prognosis. In making that statement, Xpartan has no clue with regards to the prognosis with HIV, no clue what the rate of latex allergies is, and no clue as to how quickly a latex allergy can take your life. But he swears he is on a mission of safety when the truth is he is an uneducated dumb ass who puts people at greater health risk if he is listened to. Unsurprisingly, he swallowed up all the government's Covid crap too.

Using condoms for pregnancy prevention is rational. Using condoms for HIV protection is just stupid if you really know what the risks and benefits are. Again, we all know nothing is likely to happen with condom use, but latex allergies are surprisingly common and cause itching and rashes. And in some people, you can go from a rash to full blown anaphylaxis with each subsequent use of a condom.

It is covered in the article I linked. If you read the article I linked, granted it is long, the testing in Africa for HIV is shit, the data in various countries is so poor to the point of not being believed, and like with Covid, many deaths were shoved into the AIDS category.

The author thought people in the coffin business would be booming with the AIDS "epidemic" when in fact they were going out of business. He went to what was called ground zero for AIDS expecting to see a ghost town and saw a city where the population nearly doubled. He then looked into the business of death and thought it would be pristine and it was just as corrupt as any other enterprise.

[b]And who was the lead actor in promoting the AIDS "epidemic"? That fucker Fauci. AIDS is real and so is Covid, but that self serving mother fucker massively exaggerated the risks[/b] of both for his own fame and financial benefit.[/QUOTE]Exaggerated? Come again?

2 million people died in 2004 and 2005. In just 2 years. 2 million!

Exaggerated?

[URL]https://ourworldindata.org/hiv-aids[/URL]#text=The%20 number%20 of%20 AIDS%2 Drelated, well%20 and%20 was%20 since%20 halved.

What's your threshold of dead people to call it an epidemic without quotation marks?

If Fauci and other heroic epidemiologists didn't raise awareness about AIDS (which nobody gave two fucks about because they believed it was a minority and lifestyle thing), the deaths would've been in tens million today.

[QUOTE]What does it mean to call someone a quack?
disapproving. a person who dishonestly pretends to have medical skills or knowledge.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2792102]Sub-Sahara African sexual customs and culture includes blood-letting rituals, cutting, stitching, ripping and dry sex behaviors unlike anywhere else on Earth. So much so that condoms scarcely survive the challenges even when they are worn.

Blaming "poverty" and "lack of condoms" for the almost singularly high incidence of female-to-male HIV transmission and back to female transmission in Sub-Saharan Africa ignores what many of those cultures promote sexually that, combined, will rarely if ever occur anywhere else on the planet.

I assure you it is not what happens in Thailand or any other mongering destination I have ever been.

Penis-vagina sex under conditions that exist all too often in Sub-Saharan Africa, even if using a condom, is probably more abrasive, more apt to rip and tear delicate genital skin of the pitcher and the catcher and involve more blood mixing that will directly enter the bloodstream than the way bareback anal sex is performed under ordinary and common conditions elsewhere:

[B]'Dry Sex' Is the African Sexual Health Issue No Ones Talking About.[/B]

[URL]https://www.vice.com/en/article/5gkep5/dry-sex-is-the-african-sexual-health-issue-no-ones-talking-about[/URL]

[B]Cultural practices contributing to the transmission of human immunodeficiency virus in Africa.[/B]

[URL]http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/hrdy1/[/URL]

Now, in America, the higher incidence of HIV transmission among elected male Repubs has more to do with the outcome of their wide-stance foot tapping communication with other Repub-curious men in toilet stalls.[/QUOTE]Fascinating Tooms, thanks. I haven't read this paper yet, although I probably will, along with yours:

[URL]https://journals.lww.com/aidsonline/fulltext/2007/11007/HIV_infection_does_not_disproportionately_affect.3.aspx[/URL]

It's titled "HIV infection does not disproportionately affect the poorer in sub-Saharan Africa," but that's somewhat misleading. Actually they're saying within certain African countries, the wealthiest quintiles have a higher prevalence of HIV than the poorer quintiles. This fits not only with what you said, but also with JustTK's comment, that HIV is disproportionately spread by miners and heads of polygamous families. They would be wealthier than your average Africans.

My uninformed belief is that all who commented had excellent points. Poverty and condom availability play a part, along with the other factors you and Chris brought up.

Sincerely,

Excellent Points Tiny.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2791714]Maryland as a whole has good educational results. Yet the data I presented shows that Baltimore city, not Maryland, has the fourth highest spending per student in public schools of any area in the country.

So the part of Maryland whose schools receive the highest funding per student also have the worst results (23 schools without a single student testing to his age level proficiency in math, and I believe another 20 or so in which only 1 or 2 students in the entire school did so).

Funding is already distributed far more generously to Baltimore city than the rest of Maryland, which debunks the usual leftist canard, but educational results are far worse in this heavily democrat-controlled area despite this extra funding. Why do you think that is?[/QUOTE]Once again, just because a states educational system is well funded, doesn't mean that it's allocated fairly, equitably or reasonably to facilitate all districts, according to those with the greatest needs.

That said, the Baltimore 1st Grade kids, within the state of Maryland's educational system, do seem to go on to achieve better academic results in their high school and post secondary schooling. The funding is justified, due to the higher number of students graduating at the higher levels of schooling. It's not how you start your schooling, it's how you finish your schooling.

Now if we can only do something about the theft, misappropriation and miss-allocation of educational funds and welfare aid / funds, in a state like Mississippi, that continually rank at the bottom of the country in corruption, poverty and education.

[B]4 Interesting Facts about Education in Mississippi[/B]: [i]"Mississippi legislators have [b]ignored a state[/b] law and spend $1.5 billion less on education than what is required; the cuts in the state are the deepest in the country" [/i]

[URL]https://www.theedadvocate.org/4-interesting-facts-about-education-in-mississippi/ [/URL]

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2790193]Further to the recent discussion on illiteracy and education, ... [/QUOTE]BTW, do you have a corresponding webpage for the attached chart? Didn't see one on the Foxy Muse website.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792144]My God, you are dumb. I presume you travelled abroad. Did Congress pass a law requiring you to have a Covid test when you re-entered the country? No, the executive branch made said law via a CDC recommendation. And BTW, the CDC IS a PRIVATE enterprise. Whoops.

And how about Obamacare? Oh yeah, you were required by law to purchase insurance from a PRIVATE company. Whoops.

And what body made abortion legal? Oh yeah, that would be the Supreme Court not Congress.

So the whole part about Congress making the laws has been relegated to the dust bin. So let us look at it the correct way, the parties that make and enforce laws cannot abridge freedom of speech.

Is that what happened? Damn right it did. You must be one of these dumb libs with your heads buried in the sand and have never heard of the Twitter files. A whole host of government agencies with law making and law enforcement authority were telling Twitter to shut down accounts and by far the overwhelming majority of requests were made against conservative voices.

Now let us go the other way. Twitter bans thousands of conservative accounts because of the executive branch request. Do you libs stay consistent in your views? Hell no.

A baker refused to make a cake for a gay couple, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court. [URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/narrow-ruling-supreme-court-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946[/URL].

Colorado courts ruled that the state's public accommodation law, which bans discrimination by companies offering their services to the public, did not allow Phillips to refuse the gay couple's request.

Wow, so private companies cannot do whatever they want, and you are totally wrong, Checkmate.

So WTF are you saying Checkmate? Are you saying that 50 states have laws that legally allow for political discrimination by Twitter, Facebook, and other social media outlets? I would like to see said laws or are you just blowing smoke out of your ass?[/QUOTE]1. Covid testing. Any sovereign country can make rules on entering the country as they wish. Executive branch is in charge of this aspect. Non sequitor (1st Amendment -free speech).

2. Obamacare. People, organizations and states have brought lawsuits all the way up to the supreme court. They have ruled on these. Some aspects have been changed to accomomdate. The law has not been ruled unconstitutional. Non sequitor (1st Amendment. Free speech); incidentally, you don't have to buy health insurance if you don't want to, you'll be "taxed" when you file your taxes.

3. Twitter. Executive branch can request anything of corporation, it is up to the corporation to ban or not. Your complaint should be toward Twitter. Non sequitor (1st Amendment).

4. Abortion. Row V Wade was ajudicated in 1973 using the 14th amendment as argument (as an aside, as a man, I believe women should be the ones who should write the law in which would govern how they want to proceed with the subject of abortion) Non sequitor (1st Amendment).

5. Baker. Colorado - You wrote this backward in term of timeline. The baker brought the suit against Colorado because he felt it violated his 1st Amendment right afforded to him, it went to the Supreme Court and they agreed 7-2.

US constitution and state laws can vary. When it does, a person or organization can address their grievances through the court system. States make laws that are challenged in court all the time.

6. Most law regarding discrimation is based on these familiar categories, Sex, Age, Race, Religion. Some states choose to add to the list of which you can not discrimate.

Political Affiliation is not a category that is not a thing because it is easily changeable. For instance, I was a democrat years ago, and now I'm not.

I have NOT said corporations can do whatever they want. Within the parameters of the law is how these corporations will operate. When they are outside of the law, one can address it through the court system if they are / were harmed.

BTW. I literally copied and pasted what I put in quotations, in the last post, the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution. Yes, I plagiarized directly from the source.

Also don't label people you don't know.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792219]Once again, just because a states educational system is well funded, doesn't mean that it's allocated fairly, equitably or reasonably to facilitate all districts, according to those with the greatest needs.

That said, the Baltimore 1st Grade kids, within the state of Maryland's educational system, do seem to go on to achieve better academic results in their high school and post secondary schooling. The funding is justified, due to the higher number of students graduating at the higher levels of schooling. It's not how you start your schooling, it's how you finish your schooling.

Now if we can only do something about the theft, misappropriation and miss-allocation of educational funds and welfare aid / funds, in a state like Mississippi, that continually rank at the bottom of the country in corruption, poverty and education.

[B]4 Interesting Facts about Education in Mississippi[/B]: [i]"Mississippi legislators have [b]ignored a state[/b] law and spend $1.5 billion less on education than what is required; the cuts in the state are the deepest in the country" [/i]

[URL]https://www.theedadvocate.org/4-interesting-facts-about-education-in-mississippi/ [/URL][/QUOTE]Why pick on Mississippi? The illiteracy rate, based on the National Assessment of Adult Literacy, is highest in California (23.1%) and New York (22.1%). Mississippi is in 9th place, where 16% of "American adults age 16 and over lack basic prose literacy skills defined as ranging from being fully unable to read to only being able to understand short, commonplace text in English, but nothing more advanced." And Mississippi's a small place. If you multiply the illiteracy rate by population, there are 9.1 million illiterates in California, and 4.3 million in New York. There are only 480,000 in Mississippi.

[URL]https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/us-literacy-rates-by-state[/URL]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792226]BTW, do you have a corresponding webpage for the attached chart? Didn't see one on the Foxy Muse website.[/QUOTE]Come on Spidy. It's obviously from the USA Government's web site. That's easy to figure out by looking at the figure.

[URL]https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2018/comm/school-finances.pdf[/URL]

Yes, Chris posted numbers from the Census Bureau's site, presumably so you couldn't complain that it's biased, like thirdway.org, [URL]theintercept.com[/URL], [URL]theguardian.com[/URL] and the other sources you guys favor.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792074]No, China's #1 trading partner in 1966 was Japan. [/QUOTE]Suffice to say I don't agree with anything you say, and I haven't the time to go thru and address each one of your Gish Gallop. Striaght out, the first thing you wrote is a non-sequitor. Every country in the world has a no 1 trading partner. It says absolutely zero about whether a country is banished from / throttled in the world economic community or not. Even if a country sold 1 rubber duck to another country, it would have a nr 1 trade partner. Total nonsense from the getgo Elvis.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2792003]You complain about censorship and President Trump did exactly that. He or someone in his administration asked Twitter to remove a post he didn't like.
[/QUOTE]Dear God you are a cretin. [B]Asking[/B] someone to remove a post, and doing nothing when they refuse, is not censorship.

Censorship is when you [B]forcibly[/B] remove a post or prevent someone from publishing something. Like the left did with the Biden crime family laptop corruption scandal, and much more besides.

Just for once in your simple, CNN-watching, public miseducation-brainwashed life, try and engage what few gray cells you possess behind your dull cow eyes.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792219]Once again, just because a states educational system is well funded, doesn't mean that it's allocated fairly, [/QUOTE]We don't know how well funded Maryland is. It may be underfunded. But democrat-voting Baltimore city is massively well funded: it has the third highest spending per student of all school districts in the entire country.

Despite that, Baltimore city has 23 schools with not a single student at age-level math proficiency, and 20 or so more with only 1 or 2 students at that level.

That is absolutely glaring, and no leftist is able to explain it.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2792459]We don't know how well funded Maryland is. It may be underfunded. But democrat-voting Baltimore city is massively well funded: it has the third highest spending per student of all school districts in the entire country.

Despite that, Baltimore city has 23 schools with not a single student at age-level math proficiency, and 20 or so more with only 1 or 2 students at that level.

That is absolutely glaring, and no leftist is able to explain it.[/QUOTE]Trump's Pandemic set back scores all around the country, probably all around the world. It has nothing to do with "Dem run" anything.

It turns out if a so-called "World Leader" is so bad at math he can't tell the difference in Inauguration crowd sizes even with photographic proof, can't figure out that a million fewer jobs created with his $2. 5+ Trillion deficit-spending economic "stimulus" legislation than without it was a huge waste of money, can't calculate that subtracting 5 months of Pandemic Prevention and Response monitoring and reporting from 2 months being plenty of time to prevent a Worldwide Mass Murdering, Economy and Supply Chain-destroying Pandemic from emerging after initial cases were detected equals "Your Pandemic", can't figure out that getting 7 million fewer votes, that 232 Electoral College votes is fewer than 306 and that 65 lost court cases means the election was not stolen from him, etc etc etc, then America's most dangerous math problems were not in our schools but in the White House from January 2017 to January 2021.

[B]Reading and math test scores fell across US during the pandemic. How did your state fare?[/B]

[URL]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2022/10/24/naep-report-card-test-scores-reading-math/10552407002/[/URL]

[B]Largest score declines in NAEP mathematics at grades 4 and 8 since initial assessments in 1990[/B]

[URL]https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/mathematics/2022/[/URL]

[B]American Students Have a Math Problem[/B]

[URL]https://www.statista.com/chart/28532/math-proficiency-among-us-students/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2792390]Why pick on Mississippi? [/QUOTE]Do you mean the theft, misappropriation and miss-allocation of educational funds and welfare aid / funds, in a state like Mississippi, that continually rank at the bottom of the country in corruption, poverty and education.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2792390][URL]https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/us-literacy-rates-by-state[/URL] ? The illiteracy rate, based on the National Assessment of Adult Literacy, is highest in California (23.1%) and New York (22.1%). Mississippi is in 9th place, ... [/QUOTE]What are you talking about? The link you provide, has Mississippi, Louisiana and Nevada at the bottom of the [B]literacy rate table[/B], with 84%, 84% and 83.9%, respectfully. Check the tab, that shows the "bottom" of the literacy rate table, in your link.

The results from your link, is very much in-line with the results, from a previous " illiteracy table" I provided, that uses a few other metrics, but mirrors the same results w/r to red states commonly at the bottom. No bias here, just the data. See the following link.

[b]Illiteracy Rate by State[/b]
[URL]https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/illiteracy-rate-by-state/[/URL]

Your link of "literacy rates" is only showing the reciprocal of what I already showed you, with illiteracy rates, but using slightly different metrics.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2792390]Come on Spidy. It's obviously from the USA Government's web site. That's easy to figure out by looking at the figure.

[URL]https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/visualizations/2018/comm/school-finances.pdf[/URL][/QUOTE]Yeah, that's not what I asked for. I asked if there was a webpage, associated with the chart. Meaning a page that had text associated with the chart. Got it?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2792459]Despite that, Baltimore city has 23 schools with not a single student at age-level math proficiency, and 20 or so more with only 1 or 2 students at that level.

That is absolutely glaring, and no leftist is able to explain it.[/QUOTE]Glaring as it maybe, it's only 1st grade students, don't over think it.

Like I said, it's not how you start your schooling, it's how you finish your schooling. The state has some of the best great graduation rates, in the country.

Which is greater, 10+ significant and now revered legislation proposed, fought for and passed when Dems held the WH and the majority in both houses of Congress or 0 by Repubs when they had the same advantage?

Every Great Repub Depression / Recession and Massive Job Losses of the past 100 years minus none of the Great Recoveries, Economic Expansions and Job Gains = ?

81,000,000 votes vs 74,000,000 votes + 306 EC votes vs 232 EC votes + 65 lost court case challenges and no wins = ?

5 months with no Pandemic Prevention and Response minitoring and reporting minus a 2 month heads up to avert a Pandemic and all of the deaths and economic destruction that followed = ?

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792481]Do you mean the theft, misappropriation and miss-allocation of educational funds and welfare aid / funds, in a state like Mississippi, that continually rank at the bottom of the country in corruption, poverty and education.

What are you talking about? The link you provide has Mississippi, Louisiana and Nevada at the bottom of the [B]literacy rate table[/B], with 84%, 84% and 83.9%, respectfully. Check the tab, that shows the "bottom" of the literacy rate table, in your link.

The results from your link, is very much in-line with the results, from a previous " illiteracy table" I provided, that uses a few other metrics, but mirrors the same results w / are to red states common at the bottom. No bias here, just the data. See the following link.

[URL]https://wisevoter.com/state-rankings/illiteracy-rate-by-state/[/URL]

Your link of "literacy rates" only showing the reciprocal of what I already showed you, with illiteracy rates.[/QUOTE]SPIDY, my goodness, you think that 84% of the population in Mississippi, Louisiana and Nevada is illiterate? No wonder you insist on calling Nevada a swing state instead of a blue state. Those numbers are the % of the population exhibiting "basic prose literacy skills." Or what World Population Review is calling the "literacy rate." Subtract the literacy rate from 100% to get the % of the population that's illiterate, defined, again, as the % of "American adults age 16 and over (that) lack basic prose literacy skills defined as ranging from being fully unable to read to only being able to understand short, commonplace text in English, but nothing more advanced." California and New York are at the top of the list, with only 76.9% and 77.9% respectively exhibiting basic prose literacy skills. Nevada, New Mexico, and Louisiana are in 8th through 10th places.

Btw, "Reciprocal" doesn't mean what you think it does.

Also, when you say that red states are common at the bottom of the wisevoter list, yeah, you're right. Iowa, Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, Montana, and Alaska are all in the bottom 10, of the LEAST illiterate states, according to wisevoter.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792483]Yeah, that's not what I asked for. I asked if there was a webpage, associated with the chart. Meaning a page that had text associated with the chart. Got it?[/QUOTE]Why? If you Google " Top 10 Largest School Districts by Per Pupil Current Spending", that's the first thing that comes up. But if you follow the link on the chart, it will take you here.

[URL]https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/school-finances.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792487]Glaring as it maybe, it's only 1st grade students, don't over think it.

Like I said, it's not how you start your schooling, it's how you finish your schooling. The state has some of the best great graduation rates, in the country.[/QUOTE]I don't believe that's correct. From memory, I think that included elementary, middle and high schools. However I'm too lazy to look it up. Maybe you could do me the favor of providing something that says it's only 1st grade students, since I dug up links for Chris' chart.

As to your defense of Maryland and the Baltimore school system, which you make solely because they're blue, Chris is right. Maryland is probably in the top 5 in the nation in advanced degrees and income per capita, because of all the high level, highly paid employees of the federal government, government contractors, and lobbyists and think tanks and the like. Yet still many of the schools are a laughingstock.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2792495]SPIDY, my goodness, you think that 84% of the population in Mississippi, Louisiana and Nevada is illiterate? No wonder you insist on calling Nevada a swing state instead of a blue state. Those numbers are the % of the population exhibiting "basic prose literacy skills." Or what World Population Review is calling the "literacy rate." Subtract the literacy rate from 100% to get the % of the population that's illiterate, defined, again, as the % of "American adults age 16 and over (that) lack basic prose literacy skills defined as ranging from being fully unable to read to only being able to understand short, commonplace text in English, but nothing more advanced." California and New York are at the top of the list, with only 76.9% and 77.9% respectively exhibiting basic prose literacy skills. Nevada, New Mexico, and Louisiana are in 8th through 10th places. [/QUOTE]My goodness indeed...kkkk! It that your fancy way off saying I don't know what top and bottom of the illiteracy and literacy rate tables look like.

Spin it any way you want. I think most people know what the bottom and top of a chart looks like, never mind the percentages you care to spin.

Red states like Mississippi and Louisiana are commonly at the bottom illiteracy and literacy rate tables. Period.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792500]My goodness indeed...kkkk! It that your fancy way off saying I don't know what top and bottom of the illiteracy and literacy rate tables look like. [/QUOTE]Exactly.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792500] I think most people know what the bottom and top of a chart looks like, never mind the percentages you care to spin.[/QUOTE]

Yes, that's correct too.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381] ...

Also don't label people you don't know.[/QUOTE]That's literally his thing.

Don't worry though, if enviably, he ends-up calling you the [b] "D-bag" word[/b] insult. You won't be the first and you probably won't be last.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2792495] Why? If you Google " Top 10 Largest School Districts by Per Pupil Current Spending", that's the first thing that comes up. But if you follow the link on the chart, it will take you here.

[URL]https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/school-finances.html[/URL][/QUOTE]That's better...much appreciated!

Foxy Muse, shows its real colors, as damning emails reveals, from the Dominion Voting Systems law suit court filing, that they once again, are nothing more than the sham and fraudulent news media, we've also known them to be. One without an once of any type of journalistic integrity.

The emails show, that behind closed doors, between executives and their big on-air-pundits, that no matter what, they continue to perpetrate "the Big Lie" and the fake MAGA election claims, that was inevitably more appealing to their ratings and bottom line, than it was to tell the nation, the truth.

Naturally, it wasn't very hard to sell to the gullible masses of QAnon\Repubs\MAGA insurrectionist supporters on the right, as they bought "the Big Lie" ...hook, line and sinker.

[b]"Incredibly damning": Legal experts say Dominion already has "staggering" evidence against Fox [/b]
[URL]https://www.salon.com/2023/02/23/incredibly-damning-legal-experts-say-dominion-already-has-staggering-evidence-against-fox/[/URL]

That's Foxy Muse, [b]they will always chose lies[/b] for the sake of ratings over the truth, every time. I think one politician said it best (or facsimile), "Fox News is nothing more than a state own media company, an extension of the Republican party" (Note: This was while or since Trump took office).

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792487]Glaring as it maybe, it's only 1st grade students, don't over think it.

Like I said, it's not how you start your schooling, it's how you finish your schooling. The state has some of the best great graduation rates, in the country.[/QUOTE]No, it is not only first graders.

[URL]https://foxbaltimore.com/news/local/23-baltimore-schools-with-0-students-proficient-in-math-yet-md-ranks-top-2-in-new-study[/URL]

"Among the list of 23 schools, there are 10 high schools, eight elementary schools, three Middle / High schools and two Elementary / Middle schools. And it's important to note, another 20 Baltimore City Schools had just one or two students test proficient in math. ".

Also, why are you talking about Maryland's state graduation rates? This is about Baltimore city.

Democrat-controlled Baltimore city public education receives far higher funding per student than the rest of Maryland (the third highest of any district in the entire country) and yet its results are terrible as we can see.

Again, now that your usual leftist canard of "muh funding" has been proven false, how do you explain this?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2792457]Dear God you are a cretin. [B]Asking[/B] someone to remove a post, and doing nothing when they refuse, is not censorship.

Censorship is when you [B]forcibly[/B] remove a post or prevent someone from publishing something. Like the left did with the Biden crime family laptop corruption scandal, and much more besides.

Just for once in your simple, CNN-watching, public miseducation-brainwashed life, try and engage what few gray cells you possess behind your dull cow eyes.[/QUOTE]No definition of censorship includes the words [B]forcible[/B]. That is something you came up with in your warped homophopic, xenophobic and misogynistic mind. [URL]https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/censorship[/URL] or [URL]https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/censorship[/URL].

But this is very typical of MAGAworld. So much so that Twitter started keeping a database of requests [URL]https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-trump-twitter-files-collusion-biden-censorship-1234675969/[/URL] I wish the above article would have detailed how many requests came from Donnie the Dumbass' administration and how many came from President Biden's administration.

And speaking of "misinformation", more Repugs are suspended from Twitter than Democrats because they spread more BULLSHIT. [URL]https://www.newsnationnow.com/business/tech/is-twitter-really-biased-this-study-takes-a-look/[/URL] But this isn't surprising because most of them [B]believe more bullshit[/B].

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792515]Foxy Muse, shows its real colors, as damning emails reveals, from the Dominion Voting Systems law suit court filing, that they once again, are nothing more than the sham and fraudulent news media, we've also known them to be. One without an once of any type of journalistic integrity.

The emails show, that behind closed doors, between executives and their big on-air-pundits, that no matter what, they continue to perpetrate "the Big Lie" and the fake MAGA election claims, that was inevitably more appealing to their ratings and bottom line, than it was to tell the nation, the truth.

Naturally, it wasn't very hard to sell to the gullible masses of QAnon\Repubs\MAGA insurrectionist supporters on the right, as they bought "the Big Lie" ...hook, line and sinker.

[b]"Incredibly damning": Legal experts say Dominion already has "staggering" evidence against Fox [/b]
[URL]https://www.salon.com/2023/02/23/incredibly-damning-legal-experts-say-dominion-already-has-staggering-evidence-against-fox/[/URL]

That's Foxy Muse, [b]they will always chose lies[/b] for the sake of ratings over the truth, every time. I think one politician said it best (or facsimile), "Fox News is nothing more than a state own media company, an extension of the Republican party" (Note: This was while or since Trump took office).[/QUOTE]What the moron brigade will do is say that this is all "fake news". That's why it is so easy to be a Repub. If something doesn't conform to your warped worldview, you just scream LŰGENPRESSE at the top of your lungs and the rest of the moron brigade just nods.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792515]
[B]Foxy News and "the big lie" finally bit them in the ass?[/b]

Foxy Muse, shows its real colors, as damning emails reveals, from the Dominion Voting Systems law suit court filing, that they once again, are nothing more than the sham and fraudulent news media, we've also known them to be. One without an once of any type of journalistic integrity.

The emails show, that behind closed doors, between executives and their big on-air-pundits, that no matter what, they continue to perpetrate "the Big Lie" and the fake MAGA election claims, that was inevitably more appealing to their ratings and bottom line, than it was to tell the nation, the truth.

Naturally, it wasn't very hard to sell to the gullible masses of QAnon\Repubs\MAGA insurrectionist supporters on the right, as they bought "the Big Lie" ...hook, line and sinker.

[b]"Incredibly damning": Legal experts say Dominion already has "staggering" evidence against Fox [/b]
[URL]https://www.salon.com/2023/02/23/incredibly-damning-legal-experts-say-dominion-already-has-staggering-evidence-against-fox/[/URL]

That's Foxy Muse, [b]they will always chose lies[/b] for the sake of ratings over the truth, every time. I think one politician said it best (or facsimile), "Fox News is nothing more than a state own media company, an extension of the Republican party" (Note: This was while or since Trump took office).[/QUOTE]Seriously, folks; sleep well in the knowledge that every kid in Baltimore can tell you what the square root of 8 is inside of five seconds. That hurdle has been surmounted now and forever into the future with the help of that little calculator / selfie device stuffed in their hip pocket.

But if they're fed and believe the America-hating horse shit shoveled down the throats of Faux News viewers and most other winger sources viewers, the country is doomed.

Why the sudden interest in test scores in a particular city? Interest in a certain laptop computer or Hillary Klingon's server and emails waning? But wait. KKKarlson has gobs of videos of citizens strolling through Das Kapital. Not interested in classified documents roaming Willy Nilly or impending criminal indictments?

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2792631]No definition of censorship includes the words forcible.[/QUOTE]Only the douchiest dem doofus would claim "censorship" for a tweet that wasn't taken down (and is probably still there today), but look the other way when the entire Twitter account of one of America's biggest newspapers is suspended in order to prevent them publicising the Biden crime family laptop story.

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2792720]Why the sudden interest in test scores in a particular city?[/QUOTE]Do you have an explanation for them? None of your leftist buddies have come up with one.

Remember, the school district in question has the third highest spending per student in the country, so you can't revert to your usual weak fallback position.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792500]My goodness indeed...kkkk! It that your fancy way off saying I don't know what top and bottom of the illiteracy and literacy rate tables look like.

Spin it any way you want. I think most people know what the bottom and top of a chart looks like, never mind the percentages you care to spin.

Red states like Mississippi and Louisiana are commonly at the bottom illiteracy and literacy rate tables. Period.[/QUOTE]I have already debunked this. The literacy rate correlates perfectly with the percentage of white people in the state. The over 90% white limousine liberal states like Vermont and New Hampshire obviously have higher literacy rates than places like Mississippi and Louisiana which are a third black.

The state that has got much worse (in literacy and everything else) is California, courtesy of decades of open borders.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2790530]
Tooms' posts are so Dems good, Republicans bad, no one needs to read what he says. Every post is the same. He is like Bagdad Bob in the Iraq war.
[/QUOTE]I have this image of someone (definitely not Tooms, mods!) setting up a soapbox on a street in democrat San Francisco in democrat California to livestream one of his rants about how great the democrats are, and in the background a bunch of homeless junkies are lying strung out on the sidewalk. One of them wakes up, stumbles over and relieves himself on not-Tooms's shoes, but not-Tooms doesn't notice because the stink of human excrement is already so strong everywhere in the city.

Then as he continues with his Bagdad Bob speech ("the republicans are committing suicide in their tanks! When a bunch of thugs raid the Apple store behind him, and make off with tens of thousands of dollars of gear. There are a group of police outside but they do nothing, partly because the democrat mayor has ordered them not to risk criminals' wellbeing by chasing them, and partly because they don't want to be stabbed, shot, or George Floyded while defending themselves.

Instead the cops approach not-Tooms and arrest him for making a speech on public property without a permit. Not-Tooms protests that it is his First Amendment right, but they don't seem to know what the First Amendment is. As they handcuff him, not-Tooms slips on a patch of human shit and lands facefirst in the yellow river streaming down the street from the junkie who earlier pissed on his shoes.

As the cops pick him up and push him into the squad car, his last action is to scream "Long Live the Democrat Party!

[QUOTE=Spidy;2792506]the "D-bag" word [/QUOTE]Haha! Is "the the-word" the new "and-word"? Will leftist snowflakes be reduced to screeching, tearful meltdowns, trembling and rocking in a ball in the corner, if anyone says it in their vicinity?

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2792632]What the moron brigade will do is say that this is all "fake news". That's why it is so easy to be a Repub. If something doesn't conform to your warped worldview, you just scream LŰGENPRESSE at the top of your lungs and the rest of the moron brigade just nods.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2792701]Seriously, folks; sleep well in the knowledge that every kid in Baltimore can tell you what the square root of 8 is inside of five seconds. That hurdle has been surmounted now and forever into the future with the help of that little calculator / selfie device stuffed in their hip pocket.

But if they're fed and believe the America-hating horse shit shoveled down the throats of Faux News viewers and most other winger sources viewers, the country is doomed.[/QUOTE]

More "lying press", from the Dominion Voting System (DVS) court filing emails and in an exchange of text/emails, between those at the top of Foxy Muse and their on-air star pundits, that think their Sh*t don't stink.

[b]Tucker Carlson: [/b]
[i]"Sidney Powell is lying by the way. I caught her. It's insane."[/i]

[b]Laura Ingraham:[/b]
[i]Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy {Giuliani}"[/i]

[b]Tucker Carlson: [/b]
[i]"It's unbelievably offensive to me. Our viewers are [b]good people[/b] and [b]they believe it.[/b]"[/i]

[b]Insane, lying, complete nut: How Fox News stars rejected Trumps election conspiracies while network pushed them [/b]
[URL]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-fox-news-dominion-voting-lawsuit-b2285051.html[/URL]

In other instances Tucker Carlson, referred to Sidney Powell as a, "crazy person", "lunatic", "unguided missile", "dangerous as hell", "nutcase" and "poison". And in one text message to his producer (Alex Pfeiffer), even called her (Sidney Powell), an "F***ing b*****"

And even Sean Hannity, "...that whole narrative that Sidney was pushing, I did not believe it for one second."

But the bitter-sweet irony is...you then have to wonder, [b]who's worst?[/b]

Is it:
a) Sidney Powell, the lying "F*ing b*****", nutjob conspirator, who thinks it was fraud by way of an Italian satellite DVS machine hack? Or;

b) Fucker Carlson, Laura [i]"shut up and dribble"[/i] Ingraham and Sean Hannity, the lying "F*ing on-air hypocrites", who then takes those lies, falsehoods and misinformation, and knowingly, boldface spews and peddles it, to the (gullible) "good people" watching, FOX nation?

So, is it A or B?

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2792720]Why the sudden interest in test scores in a particular city? Interest in a certain laptop computer or Hillary Klingon's server and emails waning? But wait. KKKarlson has gobs of videos of citizens strolling through Das Kapital. Not interested in classified documents roaming Willy Nilly or impending criminal indictments?[/QUOTE]

What's just as egregious, is Fucker Carlson, the on-air court jester of [b]"Cancel Culture"[/b], when it comes to "owning" the libs, but not so much when it comes to himself.

In more bombshell emails and texts, he was caught and outed, in a Dominion Voting System (DVS) court filing emails, advocating and went as far as to demand, that the company fire a FOX reporter, who had the audacity to [b]fact check a tweet from Trump[/b], that falsely accused the DVS of fraudulent voting machines.

[b]Tucker Carlson [/b](in a text to Sean Hannity):
[i]"Please get her fired.
Seriously...What the F***? I'm actually shocked...It needs to stop immediately, like tonight.
It's measurably hurting the company.
The stock price down.
Not a joke."[/i]

Under pressure from the top brass at FOX and fear of being fired, the FOX reporter the next morning, deleted her tweet.

Checkmate, I am giving you one more chance and then I am done.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381]1. Covid testing. Any sovereign country can make rules on entering the country as they wish. Executive branch is in charge of this aspect. Non sequitor (1st Amendment -free speech).[/QUOTE]I am not talking about whether the executive branch has the right to make the law. They do. I think you are so dumb you do not even get what the first amendment is about.

Are the people who make the laws allowed to censor those parties that are critical of them? Yes or no. If you answer yes, we are done and you are a clueless moron.

Did that happen with Twitter? Did executive branch officials ask that Twitter censor individuals? Yes or no. If you answer no, you are VERY ill informed, and I am done with you.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381]US constitution and state laws can vary. When it does, a person or organization can address their grievances through the court system.[/QUOTE]The constitution varies? And who are those damaged supposed to sue? Federal officials have immunity, and Elon Musk has taken over and aired all the crap that the previous ownership did wrong. Suing the federal government and winning via Bivens lawsuit is nearly impossible and costly to boot and the former Twitter employees who engaged in censorship are gone.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381]Political Affiliation is not a category that is not a thing because it is easily changeable.[/QUOTE]Again, you do not know what you are talking about. [URL]https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/16/texas-social-media-law/[/URL].

A Texas law prohibiting large social media companies from banning users' posts based on their political viewpoints will go into effect after a federal appeals court on Friday lifted a block placed on the statute.

NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association sued Texas after the law, known as House Bill 20, was passed last year, arguing that internet companies have a First Amendment right to curate content posted on their platforms and decide which types of speech they saw fit to be there.

In its ruling, the 5th USA Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the plaintiffs' argument that the law was unconstitutional, saying they were seeking protection to "muzzle free speech. ".

Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say," the ruling says.

The CCIA said the ruling forced tech companies to give equal treatment to all manners of speech, including extremist views.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381]I have NOT said corporations can do whatever they want. Within the parameters of the law is how these corporations will operate.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381]These are private businesses (not state owned) and can or can not publish whatever they wish, and are NOT related to First Amendment free speech protection.[/QUOTE]You are contradicting yourself here. You said they can do whatever they wanted. Then you said they can do whatever they want within the parameters of the law, but you just admitted that you do not even know what all the state laws are.

So why are you posting corporations can do whatever they want when you do not even know what the laws are that regulate them?

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792381]Also don't label people you don't know.[/QUOTE]And what am I supposed to think? You think it is okay that the bureaucrats and Twitter employees censored Republicans? And now you are saying you are a former Dem?

Come on man. You labeled yourself with that crap.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2792454]Suffice to say I don't agree with anything you say, and I haven't the time to go thru and address each one of your Gish Gallop. Striaght out, the first thing you wrote is a non-sequitor. Every country in the world has a no 1 trading partner. It says absolutely zero about whether a country is banished from / throttled in the world economic community or not. Even if a country sold 1 rubber duck to another country, it would have a nr 1 trade partner. Total nonsense from the getgo Elvis.[/QUOTE]You said China was banished from the world economic community. I showed you it was not. I do not get what your problem is with the USA.

Venezuela is not poor because of the USA TK. You went there and said that very thing. Venezuela is poor because their leader Hugo Chavez said it was okay to steal. Period. And he did not just steal from the USA. He stole from Europe, Russia, and China. But you go there and you say it is all the USA.

You demonize the USA when Americans are working deals where we get rich and the country we visit gets rich too. That is what happened with me in Colombian and Chile. Argentina, Bolivia, and Venezuela ripped me off, and all their countries are in the shitter. If your say stealing is okay, in the long term, your country is going to get fucked.

Yes, Americans have fucked over third world countries, but in your imagination, you think they have not done the same or worse to us. Do you know how many Latin countries have defaulted on their debt and screwed people who lent them money? The USA has never defaulted on its debt ever. That should tell you something right?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2792756]I have this image of someone (definitely not Tooms, mods!) setting up a soapbox on a street in democrat San Francisco in democrat California to livestream one of his rants about how great the democrats are, and in the background a bunch of homeless junkies are lying strung out on the sidewalk. One of them wakes up, stumbles over and relieves himself on not-Tooms's shoes, but not-Tooms doesn't notice because the stink of human excrement is already so strong everywhere in the city.
[/QUOTE]You know Tooms does not even live in the USA? He reads this biased left wing crap and then spews all this nonsense about how he knows what is best for a country he does not live in.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792867]You know Tooms does not even live in the USA? He reads this biased left wing crap and then spews all this nonsense about how he knows what is best for a country he does not live in.[/QUOTE]You boys and girls have been making personal value judgements about Dems and Repubs with that "good" vs "bad" obsession of yours.

I rarely if ever use those words to describe any politician, much less entire political parties. But you boys and girls trot out those value judgements all the time.

Very telling.

See, I only point out the irrefutable historical facts regarding Dems passing the legislation I have listed under certain conditions, producing and presiding over every major recovery, economic expansion and historic job gains and none of the Great Depressions / Great Recessions and Massive Jobs Destruction of the past 100 years while Repubs have passed nothing of note under the same conditions, produced and presided over every Great Depression, Great Recession and Massive Job Losses, etc.

Yep, it seems historical data and the actual record of results for America is the same no matter where you verify and cite it. Even in a different country, it remains the same, totally unchanged by ones proximity to the unbiased record sources.

You seem to have concluded those Dem results are "good" and the Repub results are "bad."

Well, those are your value judgements based on the facts but I have never really expressed such a thing either way.

Ya' know: I Report, You Decide.

The big difference is, unlike Faux News, what I have reported for you to pass judgement on is true, I know it to be true and so do you and everyone else.

Interesting that most of you have decided "Dems good and Repubs bad" based solely on the data and actual record of results, definitely not based on me telling you which is which. LOL. Obviously, a lot of Repub voters think those Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions and Massive Repub Job Losses are "good" and keep voting for them and that those Great Dem Recoveries and Historic Job Gains are "bad."

Again, those are personal value judgements.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2792753]Only the douchiest dem doofus would claim "censorship" for a tweet that wasn't taken down (and is probably still there today), but look the other way when the entire Twitter account of one of America's biggest newspapers is suspended in order to prevent them publicising the Biden crime family laptop story.[/QUOTE]Only a Repub would call somebody a "douche" after complaining about name calling.

Only a Repub would say that Twitter blocking the NY Post for violating Twitter's "hacked materials policy" was wrong. "Twitter initially said the Post stories ran afoul of its "hacked materials" policy, as the Rupert Murdoch-owned paper claimed the source for its Biden exposés was info supplied by Trump personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who allegedly obtained it from a MacBook Pro of unknown origin that had been abandoned in computer-repair shop in Delaware. " They had a policy and the NY Post violated it. You are upset that Twitter gave Repubs a big middle finger. [URL]https://variety.com/2020/digital/news/twitter-unblocks-new-york-post-hunter-biden-hacked-materials-1234820449/[/URL].

Having a discussion with a Repub is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon just knocks all the pieces over. Then shits all over the board. Then struts around like it won.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792863]Checkmate, I am giving you one more chance and then I am done.

I am not talking about whether the executive branch has the right to make the law. They do. I think you are so dumb you do not even get what the first amendment is about.

Are the people who make the laws allowed to censor those parties that are critical of them? Yes or no. If you answer yes, we are done and you are a clueless moron.

Did that happen with Twitter? Did executive branch officials ask that Twitter censor individuals? Yes or no. If you answer no, you are VERY ill informed, and I am done with you.

The constitution varies? And who are those damaged supposed to sue? Federal officials have immunity, and Elon Musk has taken over and aired all the crap that the previous ownership did wrong. Suing the federal government and winning via Bivens lawsuit is nearly impossible and costly to boot and the former Twitter employees who engaged in censorship are gone.

Again, you do not know what you are talking about. [URL]https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09/16/texas-social-media-law/[/URL].

A Texas law prohibiting large social media companies from banning users' posts based on their political viewpoints will go into effect after a federal appeals court on Friday lifted a block placed on the statute.

NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association sued Texas after the law, known as House Bill 20, was passed last year, arguing that internet companies have a First Amendment right to curate content posted on their platforms and decide which types of speech they saw fit to be there.

In its ruling, the 5th USA Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the plaintiffs' argument that the law was unconstitutional, saying they were seeking protection to "muzzle free speech. ".

Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say," the ruling says.

The CCIA said the ruling forced tech companies to give equal treatment to all manners of speech, including extremist views.

You are contradicting yourself here. You said they can do whatever they wanted. Then you said they can do whatever they want within the parameters of the law, but you just admitted that you do not even know what all the state laws are.

So why are you posting corporations can do whatever they want when you do not even know what the laws are that regulate them?

And what am I supposed to think? You think it is okay that the bureaucrats and Twitter employees censored Republicans? And now you are saying you are a former Dem?

Come on man. You labeled yourself with that crap.[/QUOTE]1. You should really read what you wrote. "Did executive branch officials ask that Twitter censor individuals?" Executive branch official ASKING is not the same as law making. (examples: Trump administration asked Twitter to take down Chrissy Teigen post, or Biden administration asked Twitter to take down posts) Executive branch doesn't make laws, they do, however make certain ruling based on what Congress have given them the power to do, ie. Enforce the borders as they see fit. This is how you get different enforcement codes (rules) from one administration to another.

"The ruling Friday from the 5th USA Circuit Court of Appeals likely means the case, which could have wide implications for online speech, will go before the USA Supreme Court again. " This is at the very top of the article below the headline.

You know how ISG deleted your post on 10-19-22 because you violated their policy. They can do that. Just as Twitter deleted a whole bunch of people who violated their terms of agreement. Then, Elon bought the Twitter, and changed the policy, which is his perogative. See how I don't jump up and down when policy changed, because it is not my property.

I wrote "US constitution and state laws can vary. " You read and replied, "The constitution varies?" As in Mr Phillips case, he sued the state through the Federal Court system.

You are correct that I do NOT know ALL the laws, in every state. I'm willing to bet you don't either. I can cite and comment on what the current laws that I know exist. Let's assume you've read more laws than me.

And it's funny that you asked "what am I supposed to think?"

You wrote this on 2-22-22, "Is that what happened? Damn right it did. You must be one of these dumb libs with your heads buried in the sand and have never heard of the Twitter files."

You do you. I can't help another grown man think.

I actually don't need you to give me chances on ISG forum. You have the right to express your opinions. If you choose not to interact with me or others, it's just a click away. But, I won't ever call you dumb, as you have expressed many times about me and others. This is a tactic usually employed by Bullies who want to be heard or get things his / her way.

Life is short, enoy it. Turn that frown upside down.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792866]You said China was banished from the world economic community. I showed you it was not.
[/QUOTE]No, you showed me that China was slling rubber ducks to Japan. You gave a non-sequitor.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792866]Venezuela is not poor because of the USA TK. You went there and said that very thing. Venezuela is poor because their leader Hugo Chavez said it was okay to steal. Period. And he did not just steal from the USA. He stole from Europe, Russia, and China. But you go there and you say it is all the USA.[/QUOTE]My opinion on Vnzla has nothing to do with my visit there. I formed my opinion based on economic and political evidence prior to that. I don't agree with you at all. Vnzla has been a poor country for the vast majority of its citizens since time immemorial. It has been run by rich and corrupt oligarchs since they discovered oil. They enriched themselves and were allowed to do it bcos they allowed the USA and other resource seeking countries to expropriate its oil. Whether Chavez did or did not steal money has not been proven and I doubt it would make any difference. It would hardly be a drop in the ocean compared to the hardship born by its people due to the murderous sanctions of the USA govt.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792866]You demonize the USA when Americans are working deals where we get rich and the country we visit gets rich too.
[/QUOTE]Not at all. It would be great if that were ever true. I demonise the USA govt bcos it overthrows govts that will not allow the USA to exploit its resources, when it imposes puppet regimes that oppress the local people so that they can enrich themselves.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792863]Checkmate, I am giving you one more chance and then I am done.

I am not talking about whether the executive branch has the right to make the law. They do. I think you are so dumb you do not even get what the first amendment is .[/QUOTE]The Executive Branch doe not make laws in the USA. That is the job of Congress, Senate and House of Representatives. The Executive may or may not sign it into law but does not make the laws. The President can issue Executive Orders but they are not law. The First Amendment is about the Government censorship or whatever you want to call it with regard to Free Speech and Religion and not what private entities may or may not do.

The First Amendment may protect your right to call someone dumb in public but does not prohibit a private entity such as ISG from not allowing such language. In this case ISG does not seem to care and allows it but that is their choice not the government's.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2792953]
You know how ISG deleted your post on 10-19-22 because you violated their policy. They can do that. Just as Twitter deleted a whole bunch of people who violated their terms of agreement. [/QUOTE]The first difference is that in no way can ISG be considered "the public square". Its user base is far too small. Twitter, by contrast, is extremely widely used, and cited and seen even by people who don't have accounts. It is the online public square.

The second matter is that it was not just leftists working at Twitter who were censoring rightwing users (which would be bad enough). It was that they were doing so in collusion with the Washington alphabet agencies and leading democrats, aka the deep state / the swamp.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2792867]You know Tooms does not even live in the USA? He reads this biased left wing crap and then spews all this nonsense about how he knows what is best for a country he does not live in.[/QUOTE]Yeah, typical limousine liberal. Like all those shitlibs in nice, peaceful, prosperous, 95% white Vermont or Martha's Vineyard saying how much they support the illegals pouring across the southern border thousands of miles away.

But when some illegals were sent to Martha's Vineyard, they called in the army and had them dragged away within two days.

Do as I say, not as I do.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2792922]
Only a Repub would say that Twitter blocking the NY Post for violating Twitter's "hacked materials policy" was wrong. [/QUOTE]He's actually admitting what I accused him of. He considers it "censorship" when a Chrissy Teigen tweet [B]wasn't[/B] removed, but he doesn't consider it censorship when the entire account of the New York Post was suspended to protect Biden before the election.

This is the level of reality-denying delusion in which modern leftists exist. Men are women. The border is closed. Mail-in voting is the most secure form of election. It's censorship when nothing is removed, but it isn't censorship when a newspaper's account is banned.

Thanks for confirming what I said.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2792488][b]Math Proficiency Pop Quiz[/b]

Which is greater, 10+ significant and now revered legislation proposed, fought for and passed when Dems held the WH and the majority in both houses of Congress or 0 by Repubs when they had the same advantage?

Every Great Repub Depression / Recession and Massive Job Losses of the past 100 years minus none of the Great Recoveries, Economic Expansions and Job Gains = ?

81,000,000 votes vs 74,000,000 votes + 306 EC votes vs 232 EC votes + 65 lost court case challenges and no wins = ?

5 months with no Pandemic Prevention and Response minitoring and reporting minus a 2 month heads up to avert a Pandemic and all of the deaths and economic destruction that followed = ?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2792911]You boys and girls have been making personal value judgements about Dems and Repubs with that "good" vs "bad" obsession of yours.

I rarely if ever use those words to describe any politician, much less entire political parties. But you boys and girls trot out those value judgements all the time.

Very telling.

See, I only point out the irrefutable historical facts regarding Dems passing the legislation I have listed under certain conditions, producing and presiding over every major recovery, economic expansion and historic job gains and none of the Great Depressions / Great Recessions and Massive Jobs Destruction of the past 100 years while Repubs have passed nothing of note under the same conditions, produced and presided over every Great Depression, Great Recession and Massive Job Losses, etc.

Yep, it seems historical data and the actual record of results for America is the same no matter where you verify and cite it. Even in a different country, it remains the same, totally unchanged by ones proximity to the unbiased record sources.

You seem to have concluded those Dem results are "good" and the Repub results are "bad."

Well, those are your value judgements based on the facts but I have never really expressed such a thing either way.

Ya' know: I Report, You Decide.

The big difference is, unlike Faux News, what I have reported for you to pass judgement on is true, I know it to be true and so do you and everyone else.

Interesting that most of you have decided "Dems good and Repubs bad" based solely on the data and actual record of results, definitely not based on me telling you which is which. LOL. Obviously, a lot of Repub voters think those Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions and Massive Repub Job Losses are "good" and keep voting for them and that those Great Dem Recoveries and Historic Job Gains are "bad."

Again, those are personal value judgements.[/QUOTE]Picking up Democrat Math is pretty easy. You just have to remember one equation:

x=a

Where "a" is any real number, and "x" can only have two values, Democrat or Republican.

All you have to do is to remember that if "a" represents a good outcome, then "x" is "Democrat President." And if "a" is bad, then "x" is "Republican President".

In other words, "Democrat good, Republican Bad."

Let's take an example.

x = -2.3%, where -2. 3% is year-on-year GDP growth at 12/31/2020.

Well, the right answer is x=Republican President, because an annual decline of 2.3% in GDP is a bad outcome.

Now in reality, the value of GDP growth is a function of a lot of things. A more complicated and more correct way of putting this would be

x = f(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5...xn).

Where x1 =Fed policy.

x2 = the business cycle.

x3 = external events like pandemics.

x4 = growth or decline of the size of the labor force.

x5 = changes in productivity.

Etc.

Who's president usually has very little to do with GDP growth. But, if you're a Democratic politician (with some exceptions like Joe Manchin and formerly Kyrsten Sinema) or pundit, why bother the base with endless details? It's much easier to just think "Democrat Good, Republican Bad."

You might be able to blame a good part of the Great Depression on Republicans, and the subsequent recovery on Roosevelt et al throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the problem. I'm not sure as I'm not well read on that. But as to the other recessions and following recoveries you're fond of quoting, being the 1981-1983, 2008-2009, and 2020 downturns, your explanations fall flat. Some make absolutely no sense. For example, you claim Fed policy had little to do with the 1981-1983 recession. And instead put part of the blame on bipartisan, across-the-board tax cuts. Well, that's Keynesian economics ass backwards. Increasing government spending and lowering taxes are the ways out of a recession. And blaming the 2020 recession on Trump was laughable. When I pointed out that the USA Decline in GDP in the year ended 12/31/2020 was the lowest by far of the USA, Japan, Germany, France and the UK, someone here refused to believe the numbers. Why? Well, I think I explained it above, with the Democrat Equation, x=a.

I don't really give a rats ass what happened when Hoover and Roosevelt were president. I do know that developed countries with the smallest governments are the most prosperous. And I know that the Federal Government, unlike my state and local governments, is inefficient. Democrats want to grow the size of federal government faster than Republicans. Based on correlations between government expenditures and government revenues as a % of GDP by country, I'd expect USA GDP per capita to shrink 15% to 40% in the long term if Democrats get their way, that is, if total government expenditures as a % of GDP go from around 35% to 50% on a long term basis.

And as to the so-called revered legislation, my question is how many bills were proposed, fought for and passed when Republicans held the WH and the majority in both houses of Congress that increased our unfunded liabilities by tens of trillions of dollars. I can't think of any. I'm a Libertarian who wants the federal government out of my hair to the extent possible, so your boast just sounds stupid from my point of view.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793003]The first difference is that in no way can ISG be considered "the public square". Its user base is far too small. Twitter, by contrast, is extremely widely used, and cited and seen even by people who don't have accounts. It is the online public square.

The second matter is that it was not just leftists working at Twitter who were censoring rightwing users (which would be bad enough). It was that they were doing so in collusion with the Washington alphabet agencies and leading democrats, aka the deep state / the swamp.[/QUOTE]A public square is not consider a public square if there are not enough people in the square. Is this correct? So the park by my house is not a public square because only a handful of people are there at anytime. Or if a Starbucks is fill beyond capacity because a bunch of Libs protest inside the store, and Starbucks can not have the police remove them because they have the pre-requisite number to be a public square despite it being a business that hold the public. "Public Square" argument in private property will never be a good argument.

My position is that a BUSINESS entity is entitled to write rules and enforce them as it pleases, so long as it does not harm people. Here's how you know you are not harmed, you can simply go to other social media sites and post the same thoughts you had on Twitter.

Example: you write a book that you think is amazing, and so does your friends, family and adoring fans, about how the democrats are destroying america. You take it to Simon & Shuster. They say, "no we don't want to publish this for you". This, by your definition, would be censorship. And I would agree with you about the characterization to some extent. But it is legal because it is a business that chooses what books to print in order to make money.

Take out "Simon & Shuster" and replace it with "Twitter".

Your rights are protected from government overreached and jailing you for saying or writing certain things. This too has its limits, but this has nothing to do with business choosing how to deal with their situation. The test is whether you are able to say or write the same exact thing somewhere else. And if you are able, you have no case in court.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2793039] Based on correlations between government expenditures and government revenues as a % of GDP by country, I'd expect USA GDP per capita to shrink 15% to 40% in the long term if Democrats get their way, that is, if total government expenditures as a % of GDP go from around 35% to 50% on a long term basis.[/QUOTE]That should have read "be 15% to 40% less than it would be otherwise" instead of "to shrink 15% to 40%."

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2793039]Picking up Democrat Math is pretty easy. You just have to remember one equation:

x=a

Where "a" is any real number, and "x" can only have two values, Democrat or Republican.

All you have to do is to remember that if "a" represents a good outcome, then "x" is "Democrat President." And if "a" is bad, then "x" is "Republican President".

In other words, "Democrat good, Republican Bad."

Let's take an example.

x = -2.3%, where -2. 3% is year-on-year GDP growth at 12/31/2020.

Well, the right answer is x=Republican President, because an annual decline of 2.3% in GDP is a bad outcome.

Now in reality, the value of GDP growth is a function of a lot of things. A more complicated and more correct way of putting this would be

x = f(x1, x2, x3, x4, x5...xn).

Where x1 =Fed policy.

x2 = the business cycle.

x3 = external events like pandemics.

x4 = growth or decline of the size of the labor force.

x5 = changes in productivity.

Etc.

Who's president usually has very little to do with GDP growth. But, if you're a Democratic politician (with some exceptions like Joe Manchin and formerly Kyrsten Sinema) or pundit, why bother the base with endless details? It's much easier to just think "Democrat Good, Republican Bad."

You might be able to blame a good part of the Great Depression on Republicans, and the subsequent recovery on Roosevelt et al throwing everything but the kitchen sink at the problem. I'm not sure as I'm not well read on that. But as to the other recessions and following recoveries you're fond of quoting, being the 1981-1983, 2008-2009, and 2020 downturns, your explanations fall flat. Some make absolutely no sense. For example, you claim Fed policy had little to do with the 1981-1983 recession. And instead put part of the blame on bipartisan, across-the-board tax cuts. Well, that's Keynesian economics ass backwards. Increasing government spending and lowering taxes are the ways out of a recession. And blaming the 2020 recession on Trump was laughable. When I pointed out that the USA Decline in GDP in the year ended 12/31/2020 was the lowest by far of the USA, Japan, Germany, France and the UK, someone here refused to believe the numbers. Why? Well, I think I explained it above, with the Democrat Equation, x=a.

I don't really give a rats ass what happened when Hoover and Roosevelt were president. I do know that developed countries with the smallest governments are the most prosperous. And I know that the Federal Government, unlike my state and local governments, is inefficient. Democrats want to grow the size of federal government faster than Republicans. Based on correlations between government expenditures and government revenues as a % of GDP by country, I'd expect USA GDP per capita to shrink 15% to 40% in the long term if Democrats get their way, that is, if total government expenditures as a % of GDP go from around 35% to 50% on a long term basis.

And as to the so-called revered legislation, my question is how many bills were proposed, fought for and passed when Republicans held the WH and the majority in both houses of Congress that increased our unfunded liabilities by tens of trillions of dollars. I can't think of any. I'm a Libertarian who wants the federal government out of my hair to the extent possible, so your boast just sounds stupid from my point of view.[/QUOTE]Nope. You did not even earn a participation trophy with that pro Repub Bothsider / Neithersider Bizarro World reply to some of the most blatantly obvious and blissfully easy "math" questions that every kid in Baltimore would no doubt ace even without a free calculator app on their smartphone.

And that's a pity because those are the only kind of math questions that really matter now that free calculator apps are widely available and easy to download and install on our smartphones. Well, easy for kids in blue states at least. Luckily for kids in red states that most smartphones come with calculator apps pre-installed. Assuming there is a Dem family kid around to point it out to them, that is.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793057]A public square is not consider a public square if there are not enough people in the square. Is this correct? So the park by my house is not a public square because only a handful of people are there at anytime. Or if a Starbucks is fill beyond capacity because a bunch of Libs protest inside the store, and Starbucks can not have the police remove them because they have the pre-requisite number to be a public square despite it being a business that hold the public. "Public Square" argument in private property will never be a good argument.

My position is that a BUSINESS entity is entitled to write rules and enforce them as it pleases, so long as it does not harm people. Here's how you know you are not harmed, you can simply go to other social media sites and post the same thoughts you had on Twitter.

Example: you write a book that you think is amazing, and so does your friends, family and adoring fans, about how the democrats are destroying america. You take it to Simon & Shuster. They say, "no we don't want to publish this for you". This, by your definition, would be censorship. And I would agree with you about the characterization to some extent. But it is legal because it is a business that chooses what books to print in order to make money.

Take out "Simon & Shuster" and replace it with "Twitter".

Your rights are protected from government overreached and jailing you for saying or writing certain things. This too has its limits, but this has nothing to do with business choosing how to deal with their situation. The test is whether you are able to say or write the same exact thing somewhere else. And if you are able, you have no case in court.[/QUOTE]This makes too much sense for Chrissie.

Chrissie is part of the cult that says government ought to stay out of a business' way, [B]except[/B] when the business does something that Chrissie and her friends don't like. Then, of course, Chrissie believes that the government ought to step in and [B]force[/B] the business to stop that they're doing. Of course, Chrissie and her fellow cultists don't see it that way.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793011]He's actually admitting what I accused him of. He considers it "censorship" when a Chrissy Teigen tweet [B]wasn't[/B] removed, but he doesn't consider it censorship when the entire account of the New York Post was suspended to protect Biden before the election.

This is the level of reality-denying delusion in which modern leftists exist. Men are women. The border is closed. Mail-in voting is the most secure form of election. It's censorship when nothing is removed, but it isn't censorship when a newspaper's account is banned.

Thanks for confirming what I said.[/QUOTE]Is Twitter a business? Yes. Does a business have the right to formulate their own policies? Yes they do. Does a business have the right to change their policies? Yes they do.

Therefore, in relation to your misguided worldview, [B]Twitter does not have the right to formulate their own policies.[/B] How fucked up is that? Talk about a reality-defying delusion!

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2792996]The Executive Branch doe not make laws in the USA. That is the job of Congress, Senate and House of Representatives. The Executive may or may not sign it into law but does not make the laws. The President can issue Executive Orders but they are not law[/QUOTE]And your point is what outside of semantics? So you think it is okay for a branch of government that makes law, excuse me regulations that have the full force of law, to engage in censorship?

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2792996]The First Amendment is about the Government censorship or whatever you want to call it with regard to Free Speech and Religion and not what private entities may or may not do.[/QUOTE]Oh I see. So Twitter has a policy that is against disinformation, and government agencies lie to Twitter and said the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation, and we know that there is no question these entitles lied and they knew they were lying, but that is not censorship because Twitter is a private company?

In other words, you are perfectly okay with government entities interfering in elections as long as they use a private company as the vehicle to do so.

And you expect us to believe this bullshit about the 2020 election being the fairest in history?

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793057]
My position is that a BUSINESS entity is entitled to write rules and enforce them as it pleases, so long as it does not harm people. Here's how you know you are not harmed, you can simply go to other social media sites and post the same thoughts you had on Twitter.
[/QUOTE]Except that logic doesn't work when it is a private baker who declines to bake a cake promoting homosexual sodomy. Does it? Or a hotelier who declines to rent a room to two sodomites.

And the difference is that while the homosexuals can go to any other baker and get an equally good cake (they are well-funded activists who deliberately target Christians and others who do not follow The Agenda) there is no social media site with the reach of Twitter. Twitter is genuinely the public square.

Moreover, the deeper scandal is the collaboration between "muh private company" Twitter and organs of the Washington swamp / deep state. Govt alphabet agencies and the permanent bureaucracy working to censor and harm American citizens.

Yet again, we see that the Washington swamp alphabet agencies have grown monstrously out of control and must be disbanded.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793235]And your point is what outside of semantics? So you think it is okay for a branch of government that makes law, excuse me regulations that have the full force of law, to engage in censorship?

Oh I see. So Twitter has a policy that is against disinformation, and government agencies lie to Twitter and said the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation, and we know that there is no question these entitles lied and they knew they were lying, but that is not censorship because Twitter is a private company?

In other words, you are perfectly okay with government entities interfering in elections as long as they use a private company as the vehicle to do so.

And you expect us to believe this bullshit about the 2020 election being the fairest in history?[/QUOTE]No semantics just telling you who makes the laws in the USA. Three branches of government remember or don't you even know that? Where did I say anything about ok for censorship. Once again I was telling you how the government works. Like it or not, that's how it works. Three separate branches of government, each with different responsibilities. I am repeating to help it sink in to your head. You are only good at making up what you say others are saying or thinking.

Where did I say anything about 2020 election? Man, it's obvious you are delusional. Go argue with yourself. Let us know which one of your make believe identities wins.

Twitter and Hunter Biden, what does that have to do with who makes the laws? But since you brought it up and say we all know so and so lied. How do you know? Where's your proof? And once again, what does that have to do with who makes the laws. It's the Congress and not the executive branch aka the president. Do you understand that? That's all I was pointing out.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793300]Except that logic doesn't work when it is a private baker who declines to bake a cake promoting homosexual sodomy. Does it? Or a hotelier who declines to rent a room to two sodomites.

And the difference is that while the homosexuals can go to any other baker and get an equally good cake (they are well-funded activists who deliberately target Christians and others who do not follow The Agenda) there is no social media site with the reach of Twitter. Twitter is genuinely the public square.

Moreover, the deeper scandal is the collaboration between "muh private company" Twitter and organs of the Washington swamp / deep state. Govt alphabet agencies and the permanent bureaucracy working to censor and harm American citizens.

Yet again, we see that the Washington swamp alphabet agencies have grown monstrously out of control and must be disbanded.[/QUOTE]It is pretty obvious these lefties do not believe the alphabet agencies can be evil. All they care about is the belief that they are on their side.

Unlike the complete ass sucking douches at Twitter, Mark Zuckerberg admitted to Joe Rogan that the FBI came to him and said the Hunter Biden story was Russian disinformation and asked for his help to squash the story. Here is the problem: (a) Whoever imparts or conveys or causes to be imparted or conveyed false information, knowing the information to be false, concerning an attempt or alleged attempt being made or to be made, to do any act which would be a crime prohibited by this chapter or chapter 97 or chapter 111 of this title shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $1,000 which shall be recoverable in a civil action brought in the name of the United States.

So basically, the FBI implies to Zuckerberg he could be brought up on criminal charges if he does not take down the Hunter Biden story. Zuckerberg talks to his legal team, and he does not exactly take down the story but deemphasizes it. He went over how seriously Facebook takes its job with regards to what to ban and what not to and how much he pays for it and how many people are on this team.

He then asks Rogan, "Joe, what would you have done?" And Rogan was completely caught off guard and kind of mumbles out some gibberish. I could not believe it. I actually felt sorry for Mark Zuckerberg and so did Joe Rogan. Later on, Rogan said Zuckerberg had an impossible job, and he does.

So now we know the Democratic douche definition of censorship, and that is that it is completely legal to censor anything as long as it benefits the Democratic party.

What are we complaining about right? Zuckerberg made the decision, and the FBI was just there to help. And by helping, I mean the FBI was there to lie their asses off.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793235]And your point is what outside of semantics? So you think it is okay for a branch of government that makes law, excuse me regulations that have the full force of law, to engage in censorship?

Oh I see. So Twitter has a policy that is against disinformation, and government agencies lie to Twitter and said the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation, and we know that there is no question these entitles lied and they knew they were lying, but that is not censorship because Twitter is a private company?

In other words, you are perfectly okay with government entities interfering in elections as long as they use a private company as the vehicle to do so.

And you expect us to believe this bullshit about the 2020 election being the fairest in history?[/QUOTE]Wingers are the least informed dimwits on the planet. Yet well before the 2020 election every Winger had an idiotic notion in his or her otherwise empty skull that something evil about Joe Biden lurked somewhere inside his son's laptop next to the videos of his son smoking crack and getting a footjob from an Asian hooker.

And virtually everyone who was well-informed and therefore voted for Joe Biden knew all those Wingers were desperately grasping at straws with that BS in a vain attempt to salvage another losing election for their historic election-losing candidate whose only notable "win" was squeaking in on the pro Repub rigging built into the system back in 2016 despite losing the vote by millions.

Nobody needed Twitter to hear about that laptop idiocy. Twitter did not suppress or deny anyone anything regarding that crap re the election.

Hell, I almost never go on Twitter, knew that laptop bit was total crap and didn't even have the slightest interest in hearing about it. Yet I must have heard or read something about that nothingness in Mainstream Media and all over the Internet every waking hour of every day for months before the 2020 election AND the 2022 election. Just as I am sure I will see and hear about it until and likely beyond the 2024 election!

What the hell else is on the Redrawn Districts Pink Tinkle House Majority's platform and agenda for the next 21 months besides that and figuring out some new and unprecedented way to Crash the USA economy and Wipe Out millions of USA Jobs while hobbled in that sole Repub mission by not also having control of the White House or the Senate?

Nothing.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793235]And your point is what outside of semantics? So you think it is okay for a branch of government that makes law, excuse me regulations that have the full force of law, to engage in censorship?

Oh I see. So Twitter has a policy that is against disinformation, and government agencies lie to Twitter and said the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation, and we know that there is no question these entitles lied and they knew they were lying, but that is not censorship because Twitter is a private company?

In other words, you are perfectly okay with government entities interfering in elections as long as they use a private company as the vehicle to do so.

And you expect us to believe this bullshit about the 2020 election being the fairest in history?[/QUOTE]What horse puckey. Even Twitter folks said that Twitter did nothing wrong. "James Baker, a former lawyer for Twitter who also previously worked for the FBI, said he didn't act "as an agent or an operator of the government" while working for the social media company. Baker said the company's actions were "fully consistent with the First Amendment."

"I am aware of no unlawful collusion with, or direction from, any government agency or political campaign on how Twitter should have handled the Hunter Biden laptop situation," Baker told the panel. " [URL]https://news.bloomberglaw.com/tech-and-telecom-law/house-gop-opens-hunter-biden-probe-focusing-on-what-twitter-did[/URL].

The ONLY PEOPLE who have your fucked up worldview are people who think like you. You can rant all you want but the simple FACTS are that nobody lied. People "thought" that the Hunter Biden laptop issue WAS Russian disinformation because it had all of the hallmarks of Russian disinformation. And once more, the Repubs in Congress (because they have no taste for actually governing) will waste untold countless millions of dollars and untold countless person-hours (see the Durham investigation) going down the laptop rabbit-hole. They will come up empty, of course, but that won't stop Repubs to crow that they found something but that the "deep state" prevented them from making it public.

And, in response you your earlier rant about cake baking, even FUX Snooze reported that SCOTUS ruled FOR the baker. And that was in 2018, IIRC. So your once-again-fucked-up-logic is 4 years too late. Even though SCOTUS' decision was undoubtedly incorrect, at least according to Harvard Law. [URL]https://harvardcrcl.org/why-you-cant-sell-your-cake-and-control-it-too-distinguishing-use-from-design-in-masterpiece-cakeshop-v-colorado/[/URL].

And if the 2020 election was rife with fraud, as you and Donnie the Dumbass contend, show us the PROOF. Even Donnie's own people (like Billy Barr) said that it was all "bullshit". The 60+ lawsuits filed by Donnie the Dumbass' crackpot legal team never did allege fraud and every single one of those lawsuits were thrown out. Your next argument will be about standing but even the dumbest first-year law student knows that you can't file a lawsuit unless you can show, in your lawsuit, the EVIDENCE of injury. Evidence, by the way, that Donnie the Dumbass' crackpot team of legal geniuses failed to provide. Everybody knows, well everybody with a brain knows, that all of this election-fraud bullshit is just that.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793300]Except that logic doesn't work when it is a private baker who declines to bake a cake promoting homosexual sodomy. Does it? Or a hotelier who declines to rent a room to two sodomites.

And the difference is that while the homosexuals can go to any other baker and get an equally good cake (they are well-funded activists who deliberately target Christians and others who do not follow The Agenda) there is no social media site with the reach of Twitter. Twitter is genuinely the public square.

Moreover, the deeper scandal is the collaboration between "muh private company" Twitter and organs of the Washington swamp / deep state. Govt alphabet agencies and the permanent bureaucracy working to censor and harm American citizens.

Yet again, we see that the Washington swamp alphabet agencies have grown monstrously out of control and must be disbanded.[/QUOTE]You forgot the other half. There have been plenty to bakers suing, some have proven in court that they were harmed, and some haven't. Well funded on both sides to take these grievences to court. Burden of proof in court is on the plantiff to prove that they have been harmed. Are they promoting sodomy if they bake a cake with the words, "Congratualtions" and two bride figurines? Remember, women can ge gay too.

As for the hotelier, does this hotel have rules posted that sodomy is not allowed. They can do that you know? It'll be pretty stupid because in order to enforce it, you have to have eyes in the room (s). No anal sex woupld apply to heterosexual couples as well, other wise this would beeeeeee, say it with me, discrimination. Yes, heteros have anal sex too. How odd that you are on ISG demonizing anal sex.

Your argument seems to always have boogie men and generalizations. What is the deep state? Which alphabet agencies are pulling the strings? Where ever you are getting the info, drill down on the answer a little bit. Typically, they will have some strange, broad statement without details so that your mind will imagine the rest of the story. George Soros and Charles Koch are private citizen with shitload of cash, they can support or go against anything they want, their perogative. Stories about them usually contain something like, "he's destroying america with his influence. " Usually, their influence is mainly to their own benefit, good on them.

Believe or not, I like conspiracy theories too. But for me they are entertainment until it becomes true, which happens every once in a very long while. And when it does 99.99999% of the time, it has no impact on my life.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2793216]Is Twitter a business? Yes. Does a business have the right to formulate their own policies? Yes they do. Does a business have the right to change their policies? Yes they do.

Therefore, in relation to your misguided worldview, [B]Twitter does not have the right to formulate their own policies.[/B] How fucked up is that? Talk about a reality-defying delusion![/QUOTE]Don't you know?

We're all about the rights of private businesses -- just not when we dislike their policies.

And of course, we're staunch defenders of states' rights -- except for those disgusting woke states we hate.

And hey, we're totally the party of law and order -- just not when cops are staying between us and the next term for Orange Entertainer. Then all bets are off.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793382]It is pretty obvious these lefties do not believe the alphabet agencies can be evil. All they care about is the belief that they are on their side.

Unlike the complete ass sucking douches at Twitter, Mark Zuckerberg admitted to Joe Rogan that the FBI came to him and said the Hunter Biden story was Russian disinformation and asked for his help to squash the story. Here is the problem: (a) Whoever imparts or conveys or causes to be imparted or conveyed false information, knowing the information to be false, concerning an attempt or alleged attempt being made or to be made, to do any act which would be a crime prohibited by this chapter or chapter 97 or chapter 111 of this title shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more than $1,000 which shall be recoverable in a civil action brought in the name of the United States.

So basically, the FBI implies to Zuckerberg he could be brought up on criminal charges if he does not take down the Hunter Biden story. Zuckerberg talks to his legal team, and he does not exactly take down the story but deemphasizes it. He went over how seriously Facebook takes its job with regards to what to ban and what not to and how much he pays for it and how many people are on this team.

He then asks Rogan, "Joe, what would you have done?" And Rogan was completely caught off guard and kind of mumbles out some gibberish. I could not believe it. I actually felt sorry for Mark Zuckerberg and so did Joe Rogan. Later on, Rogan said Zuckerberg had an impossible job, and he does.

So now we know the Democratic douche definition of censorship, and that is that it is completely legal to censor anything as long as it benefits the Democratic party.

What are we complaining about right? Zuckerberg made the decision, and the FBI was just there to help. And by helping, I mean the FBI was there to lie their asses off.[/QUOTE]Yes, the corruption of the alphabet agencies / deep state / swamp has reached banana republic proportions. Openly intimidating and lying to media in order to protect the woke Agenda candidate in the election (which they still had to rig regardless).

Not that I really think Zuckerberg was too upset about any of it. He's a member of the tribe and on board with The Agenda; he's just trying to give himself and his failing website a big of credibility with the growing millions of people who are sick of the entire situation. Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

Your second last point is the most salient one. It's legal to do whatever benefits the woke left democrats. 60 years ago, when America was sane and normal and not overrun with trannies, faggots, illegals and anti-white hate propaganda, they were all in on "free speech" (which basically meant pornography and other ways to undermine society). But of course now that they have succeeded in making these ideas mainstream (thanks largely to media ownership by people from Zuckerberg's tribe) they are all in on censorship to prevent people pointing out their lunatic inconsistencies and wrongheadedness.

Frankly, we need a complete reset and probably partition.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2793508]Even Twitter folks said that Twitter did nothing wrong. "James Baker, a former lawyer for Twitter who also previously worked for the FBI, said he didn't act "as an agent or an operator of the government" while working for the social media company. Baker said the company's actions were "fully consistent with the First Amendment."
[/QUOTE]Hahaha! The Twitter FBI agent said Twitter and the FBI did nothing wrong! Well that's OK then!

The funny thing is these douchey dem doofus leftists are so brainwashed and lacking in critical thinking skills they actually believe the previous sentence. We cannot maintain a free first world society with such people. Better to separate, let them create their communist utopia and watch from a distance how it ends up for them.

P.S. If you want to know the reality about Twitter, Elon Musk the new owner said that having spent months looking under the hood, pretty much every "conspiracy theory" about it turned out to be true.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793518]You forgot the other half. There have been plenty to bakers suing, some have proven in court that they were harmed, and some haven't. Well funded on both sides to take these grievences to court. Burden of proof in court is on the plantiff to prove that they have been harmed. Are they promoting sodomy if they bake a cake with the words, "Congratualtions" and two bride figurines? Remember, women can ge gay too.

As for the hotelier, does this hotel have rules posted that sodomy is not allowed. They can do that you know? It'll be pretty stupid because in order to enforce it, you have to have eyes in the room (s). No anal sex woupld apply to heterosexual couples as well, other wise this would beeeeeee, say it with me, discrimination. Yes, heteros have anal sex too. How odd that you are on ISG demonizing anal sex.

Your argument seems to always have boogie men and generalizations. What is the deep state? Which alphabet agencies are pulling the strings? Where ever you are getting the info, drill down on the answer a little bit. Typically, they will have some strange, broad statement without details so that your mind will imagine the rest of the story. George Soros and Charles Koch are private citizen with shitload of cash, they can support or go against anything they want, their perogative. Stories about them usually contain something like, "he's destroying america with his influence. " Usually, their influence is mainly to their own benefit, good on them.

Believe or not, I like conspiracy theories too. But for me they are entertainment until it becomes true, which happens every once in a very long while. And when it does 99.99999% of the time, it has no impact on my life.[/QUOTE]Whether or not the bakers end up winning, the process is the punishment. They have to take huge amounts of time and money away from their business and their life and family to support their case. Even if they win, they don't get that time back, and they probably won't recoup all the costs to their lawyers. The plaintiffs lose nothing even if they lose the case: they are funded by Big Fag as part of the movement to destroy any opposition to the Globohomo Agenda.

As I've said, the alphabet agencies are the Washington law enforcement / intel agencies. They are a leading part of the swamp / deep state, along with leading democrat (and RINO) politicians, mainstream fake news media organizations, Big Tech, Wall Street, the Israel lobby, and the military-industrial complex.

They often work in conjunction against opponents of the woke Globohomo "Open Borders and Open Buttholes / Invade the world and invite the world" Agenda. For instance, when a movement they don't like arises such as the Tea Party a decade ago, the alphabet agencies open investigations and political persecutions of them (see the Lois Lerner scandal and the IRS targeting groups for political reasons). Meanwhile the mainstream fake news demonizes them, and Big Tech bans or shadowbans them. In certain cases, Wall Street debanks them (see Kanye West).

Simultaneously, while the Jews in the ADL and SPLC work with their cousins in the media and finance to attack the organization or individual, they use their links with democrat and RINO politicians on Capitol Hill (most of whom are funded by one deep state organization or another) to get legislation passed, or maybe to get a fake FBI "investigation" in which the majority of participants are FBI agents provocateurs as in the case of the Gretchen Whitmer "kidnap plot" or January 6.

It's a well-oiled machine, all to ensure that regular heritage Americans like those in East Palestine get completely screwed, disenfranchised, and ultimately replaced. $100 billion plus for Ukraine (read: Wall Street and the military-industrial complex), nothing for American victims of the chemical disaster. The faggot Transport Secretary Buttigieg wasn't even planning to visit until President Trump showed up to support Americans in need.

As for "conspiracy theories", as Elon Musk said a few months after buying and thoroughly investigating Twitter, pretty much every "conspiracy theory" about it turned out to be true. He should know.

Finally, call me old-fashioned but I never really saw the appeal of anal when there's a perfectly good pussy to fuck!

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2793508]People "thought" that the Hunter Biden laptop issue WAS Russian disinformation [/QUOTE]Bullshit. The alphabet agencies knew perfectly well it was real. And yet they colluded with media and Big Tech to create the impression that it was not, in order to protect the woke globohomo Agenda candidate before an election (which they had to rig even after all the censorship: imagine the mammoth landslide victory Trump would have had without censorship or mail-in rigging).

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793235]
And you expect us to believe this bullshit about the 2020 election being the fairest in history?[/QUOTE]Politics aside, you just need a modicum of intelligence and critical thinking ability to understand that mass mail-in voting is bullshit.

Which is more secure: an election in which people show up to vote in person with ID to verify their identity, on paper ballots which are held securely and counted under scrutiny from all parties on the night of the election?

Or hundreds of millions of ballots spammed out freely to every address in the country, "harvested" en masse from inner city ghettos, retirement homes and who knows where else by Soros- and Zuckerberg-funded democrat political operatives, and then republican scrutineers kicked out of the counting halls in democrat-run cities?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793587]Whether or not the bakers end up winning, the process is the punishment. They have to take huge amounts of time and money away from their business and their life and family to support their case. Even if they win, they don't get that time back, and they probably won't recoup all the costs to their lawyers. The plaintiffs lose nothing even if they lose the case: they are funded by Big Fag as part of the movement to destroy any opposition to the Globohomo Agenda.

As I've said, the alphabet agencies are the Washington law enforcement / intel agencies. They are a leading part of the swamp / deep state, along with leading democrat (and RINO) politicians, mainstream fake news media organizations, Big Tech, Wall Street, the Israel lobby, and the military-industrial complex.

They often work in conjunction against opponents of the woke Globohomo "Open Borders and Open Buttholes / Invade the world and invite the world" Agenda. For instance, when a movement they don't like arises such as the Tea Party a decade ago, the alphabet agencies open investigations and political persecutions of them (see the Lois Lerner scandal and the IRS targeting groups for political reasons). Meanwhile the mainstream fake news demonizes them, and Big Tech bans or shadowbans them. In certain cases, Wall Street debanks them (see Kanye West).

Simultaneously, while the Jews in the ADL and SPLC work with their cousins in the media and finance to attack the organization or individual, they use their links with democrat and RINO politicians on Capitol Hill (most of whom are funded by one deep state organization or another) to get legislation passed, or maybe to get a fake FBI "investigation" in which the majority of participants are FBI agents provocateurs as in the case of the Gretchen Whitmer "kidnap plot" or January 6.

It's a well-oiled machine, all to ensure that regular heritage Americans like those in East Palestine get completely screwed, disenfranchised, and ultimately replaced. $100 billion plus for Ukraine (read: Wall Street and the military-industrial complex), nothing for American victims of the chemical disaster. The faggot Transport Secretary Buttigieg wasn't even planning to visit until President Trump showed up to support Americans in need.

As for "conspiracy theories", as Elon Musk said a few months after buying and thoroughly investigating Twitter, pretty much every "conspiracy theory" about it turned out to be true. He should know.

Finally, call me old-fashioned but I never really saw the appeal of anal when there's a perfectly good pussy to fuck![/QUOTE]After reading your gibberish, I got this impression, and I'll be polite:

You believe people shouldn't be allowed to file lawsuits because they feel that they have been harmed by discrimination. Plaintiffs don't pay lawyers or filing fees to go to court. And that it cost the business owner too much to defend their business practice. I believe that is a business decision.

You don't like gay people (men). Curious if you have the same animus toward gay women;.

You don't like jewish people;.

You don't like wall street, Big Tech, law enforcement, intelligent agencies, military industry complex.

You don't like "mainstream fake news media organizations". Who are the "real" news media organizations?

You believe there's a scandal of Lois Lerner [URL]https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/IRS1023.pdf[/URL].

You like kidnapping plotters [URL]https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/final-defendant-michigan-governor-kidnapping-plot-sentenced-over-19-years-prison.[/URL].

You don't like Big Tech (shadow) banning people, but you like other companies to actually ban people.

You believe "heritage Americans" will be replaced. By who?

And, anal sex does not appeal to you.

Got it!

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793587]heritage Americans like... The faggot Transport Secretary ...

Finally, call me old-fashioned but I never really saw the appeal of anal when there's a perfectly good pussy to fuck![/QUOTE]Can I ask. What do you mean by heritage American? I never heard the expression before.

And what did gay folk do to you that got you so angry with them? I don't like classical music, but I don't feel the need to insult people that do like it at every opportunity.

I don't think you are necessarily old-fashioned, just missing out.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793574]
Not that I really think Zuckerberg was too upset about any of it. He's a member of the tribe and on board with The Agenda; he's just trying to give himself and his failing website a big of credibility with the growing millions of people who are sick of the entire situation. Methinks the lady doth protest too much.[/QUOTE]Good point. I forgot about all the money he poured into the 2020 election and now he is trying to appear non-partisan. But I will ask you Chris, what would you have done if the FBI came up to you and said a story, forget about it being Hunter Biden, was disinformation, and you could go to jail if you published it. It is easy to say you would stand up to them, but the federal government, which has way too much power, can fuck you over in a million different ways.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793592]Bullshit. The alphabet agencies knew perfectly well it was real. And yet they colluded with media and Big Tech to create the impression that it was not, in order to protect the woke globohomo Agenda candidate before an election[/QUOTE]Who gives a shit what a FBI lawyer thinks? We have the goods already. And not only that we have the FBI griping Twitter did not have more evidence of the so called Russian bots that were responsible for Trump winning in 2016.

So any alphabet agency in the federal government can just go to Twitter or Facebook and say "We believe this is disinformation" and censor a story. They do not have to be factually correct just believing is enough.

So PVM, let us get off your Democratic douche agenda and your whataboutism and go with absolutes. Give me one non-partisan story that has political impact that an alphabet agency could not censor today. Given your ridiculous standard of what qualifies as censorship. Watergate never would have happened, and Nixon would have finished out his term.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2793397]Wingers are the least informed dimwits on the planet. Yet well before the 2020 election every Winger had an idiotic notion in his or her otherwise empty skull that something evil about Joe Biden lurked somewhere inside his son's laptop next to the videos of his son smoking crack and getting a footjob from an Asian hooker.

And virtually everyone who was well-informed and therefore voted for Joe Biden knew all those Wingers were desperately grasping at straws with that BS in a vain attempt to salvage another losing election for their historic election-losing candidate whose only notable "win" was squeaking in on the pro Repub rigging built into the system back in 2016 despite losing the vote by millions.

Nobody needed Twitter to hear about that laptop idiocy. Twitter did not suppress or deny anyone anything regarding that crap re the election.

Hell, I almost never go on Twitter, knew that laptop bit was total crap and didn't even have the slightest interest in hearing about it.[/QUOTE]When you go into Bagdad Bob mode, Tooms, we know you have admitted defeat.

Laptop bit was total crap? LOL.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793576]Hahaha! The Twitter FBI agent said Twitter and the FBI did nothing wrong! Well that's OK then!

The funny thing is these douchey dem doofus leftists are so brainwashed and lacking in critical thinking skills they actually believe the previous sentence. We cannot maintain a free first world society with such people. Better to separate, let them create their communist utopia and watch from a distance how it ends up for them.

P.S. If you want to know the reality about Twitter, Elon Musk the new owner said that having spent months looking under the hood, pretty much every "conspiracy theory" about it turned out to be true.[/QUOTE]So Matt Added Taibbi, didn't say this? "There's no evidence — that I've seen — of any government involvement in the laptop story. " [URL]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/twitter-files-matt-taibbi-bari-weiss-michael-shellenberger-elon-musk/[/URL].

Kinda blows your "all of the alphabet agencies lied" about the laptop thing, doesn't it?

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]After reading your gibberish, I got this impression, and I'll be polite:

You believe people shouldn't be allowed to file lawsuits because they feel that they have been harmed by discrimination. Plaintiffs don't pay lawyers or filing fees to go to court. And that it cost the business owner too much to defend their business practice. I believe that is a business decision.

You don't like gay people (men). Curious if you have the same animus toward gay women;.

You don't like jewish people;.

You don't like wall street, Big Tech, law enforcement, intelligent agencies, military industry complex.

You don't like "mainstream fake news media organizations". Who are the "real" news media organizations?

You believe there's a scandal of Lois Lerner [URL]https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/IRS1023.pdf[/URL].

You like kidnapping plotters [URL]https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/final-defendant-michigan-governor-kidnapping-plot-sentenced-over-19-years-prison.[/URL].

You don't like Big Tech (shadow) banning people, but you like other companies to actually ban people.

You believe "heritage Americans" will be replaced. By who?

And, anal sex does not appeal to you.

Got it![/QUOTE]Your reply is spot on.

Gibberish is Chrissie's stock-in-trade. The more off-the-wall something is, the harder she pushes it.

Chrissie loves to use the term "heritage Americans" but forgets that she and every one of her ancestors are immigrants.

And actually, anal sex appeals to Chrissie very much. People who complain the loudest about something are usually the first ones to embrace it (in secret, of course).

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]
You believe people shouldn't be allowed to file lawsuits because they feel that they have been harmed by discrimination.[/QUOTE]I am opposed to compelled speech. When you try to force a baker to make a cake celebrating the "marriage" of two homosexuals, you are compelling him to make an expression with which he does not agree. That is tyranny. There are plenty of other bakers who would be happy to bake the cake, so the only reason for these cases is vindictive targeting of opponents by woke Globohomo.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]Plaintiffs don't pay lawyers or filing fees to go to court. And that it cost the business owner too much to defend their business practice. I believe that is a business decision.[/QUOTE]Most of these homosexual Agenda activists are funded by Big Fag via Soros or some other leftist Jew. So no, they don't pay out of their own pocket.

And it is not a "business decision" to be stuck in years of costly legal hell. These ridiculous and overtly political cases should be thrown out at the first hurdle. As indeed they are the other way round.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You don't like gay people (men). Curious if you have the same animus toward gay women[/QUOTE]I'm opposed to the homosexual Agenda, aka Big Fag, in particular its targeting of children. Pedophilia has always been rife among homosexual men, and this push to sexualize small children in elementary school, touch them at "drag queen story hour", and allow them to sterilize themselves and mutilate their genitals, is done with the aim of having sexual access to them.

If you can allow an elementary school age boy to say he's a faggot, or change his gender, then he is already sexualized. It's not a huge step to saying that he can consent to sex with adults. Woke globohomo media are even trying to use the term "MAP" (Minor-Attracted Person) instead of pedophile, to condition and normalize people toward their ultimate goal of fucking little boys.

As for lesbians, they hardly exist in reality. Women's sexuality has always been fluid and based around trends of the time. Centuries ago, if one tribe defeated another, they would kill all the men and the women would save themselves by fucking / marrying the winners. Nowadays, because Globohomo hollyweird and media has made lesbianism trendy (at least in the cringe circles that certain urban sluts exist) some of them are declaring themselves to be lesbian. It is just another female strategy to gain attention and advance themselves in society.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You don't like jewish people[/QUOTE]We need to have a conversation about why and how the majority of American media, finance and hollywood is owned and controlled by an ethno-religious group that constitutes only 2% of the population. That would be the case if it was any such group. We also need to discuss the effects of this on the majority of American people, and society as a whole.

The current situation, in which aforementioned media, finance and hollywood attempt to silence any discussion of the above facts, is not sustainable and indeed deeply repressive.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You don't like wall street, Big Tech, law enforcement, intelligent agencies, military industry complex.[/QUOTE]Local law enforcement, ie sheriffs directly elected by and beholden to the people they serve and protect, is great. Corrupt federal deep state alphabet agencies answerable to nobody except the Washington woke globohomo swamp are not.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You don't like "mainstream fake news media organizations". Who are the "real" news media organizations?[/QUOTE]There are some good journalists and news organizations out there. Glenn Greenwald for example (note that he is a homosexual but I don't have a problem with him because he doesn't push his identity, engage in public sodomy parades, or attempt to groom children for sex). Andy NGO has done some great reporting on the antifa / BLM riots (and been violently attacked by antifa, while federal law enforcement looked the other way because antifa supports The Agenda).

Tucker Carlson is excellent, and has earned his position as the most watched and trusted anchor in America. Some of the other people at Fox are good too, such as Brian Kilmeade. Newsmax and OAN have been decent from what I have seen of them. The Federalist is worth reading, and Breitbart still has its moments (though since Steve Bannon left it has become too hysterically Zionist). Andrew Anglin is one of the best living writers, hilarious and informative at a deep level. [URL]Vdare.com[/URL] (which is currently undergoing the aforementioned deep state attack, having been debanked and attacked by Jewish finance and fake news) is compelling. The Washington Examiner is OK. Many more.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You believe there's a scandal of Lois Lerner[/QUOTE]The IRS admitted illegally targeting right wing groups [URL]https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/remember-the-irs-targeting-scandal-no-one-ever-got-punished-for-it[/URL].

But of course nobody was punished because the globohomo deep state swamp protects its own, just like Crooked Hillary Clinton wasn't punished for clearly breaking the law by using a private servers and deleting her emails while Secretary of State, and Sleepy Joe "10% for the Big Guy" Biden wasn't punished for openly boasting about threatening to withhold US govt loan while VP in order to force Ukraine to fire a prosecutor who was investigating his son's criminal activity in the country.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You like kidnapping plotters[/QUOTE]In the so-called Whitmer "kidnap" plot, which was in reality a political entrapment plot, it transpired that an actual majority of the so-called "plotters" were FBI agents or assets. [URL]https://thefederalist.com/2021/07/26/the-fbis-whitmer-kidnapping-case-looks-like-a-potemkin-terror-plot/[/URL].

"The FBI, through informants and undercover agents, hatched the kidnapping plot, served in the key leadership positions of the militia group, trained the militia members in military tactics, actively recruited participants, and funded much of the militia's activities. Then, when various members of the Watchman militia became uncomfortable with the kidnapping plot, with several quitting, the FBI's primary informant pushed the plot along, eventually becoming the militia group's leader. ".

January 6 was run along similar lines.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You don't like Big Tech (shadow) banning people, but you like other companies to actually ban people.[/QUOTE]As I said above, I am opposed to compelled speech. That does not apply to Big Tech specifically because of Section 230, which states that as sites like Twitter, Facebook and Google are merely platforms not publishers, they cannot be sued for anything that is written or said on them.

That was indeed the case until 2016. However, the election of Trump and the growing rejection of woke Globohomo lunacy meant that the woke deep state was forced to begin censoring its opposition because its fake news and twisted message was being so thoroughly debunked. This made the Big Tech platforms publishers, as they were deciding what was to be posted and publicised, rather than simply allowing the free competition of ideas (something that the left can never do because its ideas are so utterly full of shit and wacky).

Big Tech must go back to being free speech platforms, not publishers. If not, its Section 230 privileges must be removed.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2793647]You believe "heritage Americans" will be replaced. By who?[/QUOTE]By the tens of millions of immigrants let in since the fraudulently passed 1965 Immigration Bill, whose authors promised that it would not alter the demographic make up of America. This is of course accelerating now that the Biden regime has opened the southern border and is providing welfare gibsmedats to any unskilled 80 IQ loser who shows up.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2793659]Can I ask. What do you mean by heritage American? I never heard the expression before.

And what did gay folk do to you that got you so angry with them? I don't like classical music, but I don't feel the need to insult people that do like it at every opportunity.

I don't think you are necessarily old-fashioned, just missing out.[/QUOTE]Heritage Americans are Americans here before the 1965 Immigration Act was fraudulently passed.

The authors and backer of the Act, including Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy and the Jewish congressman Emanuel Celler (it was named the Hart-Celler Act) falsely promised Americans that the demographic balance of the country would not be changed.

As for homosexuals, I am opposed to their public sodomy parades but most of all their targeting of children for grooming with the ultimate goal of legalizing pedophilia (see my previous post).

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793660]Good point. I forgot about all the money he poured into the 2020 election and now he is trying to appear non-partisan. But I will ask you Chris, what would you have done if the FBI came up to you and said a story, forget about it being Hunter Biden, was disinformation, and you could go to jail if you published it. It is easy to say you would stand up to them, but the federal government, which has way too much power, can fuck you over in a million different ways.[/QUOTE]Zuckerberg is a multi-billionaire public figure with a huge media platform. There is no way whatsoever the FBI would have arrested him if he had allowed people to publicize the Biden laptop story on Facebook.

Elon Musk, a figure of similar stature to Zuckerberg, has stood up to the FBI and deep state by releasing the Twitter Files detailing FBI and other alphabet agency corruption and political interference in the election to support and protect the woke deep state globohomo candidate Biden. He is not languishing in prison.

Zuckerberg is just trying to pretend he is impartial, probably to save his failing platform which is dying. But the real scandal in all of this is the open bias and lies of the Washington deep state alphabet agencies who knew the laptop was real but pretended it was fake in order to interfere in the election. They are no longer fit for purpose and must be disbanded.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793661]Who gives a shit what a FBI lawyer thinks? We have the goods already. And not only that we have the FBI griping Twitter did not have more evidence of the so called Russian bots that were responsible for Trump winning in 2016.

So any alphabet agency in the federal government can just go to Twitter or Facebook and say "We believe this is disinformation" and censor a story. They do not have to be factually correct just believing is enough.

So PVM, let us get off your Democratic douche agenda and your whataboutism and go with absolutes. Give me one non-partisan story that has political impact that an alphabet agency could not censor today. Given your ridiculous standard of what qualifies as censorship. Watergate never would have happened, and Nixon would have finished out his term.[/QUOTE]Yes, in fact they didn't even believe the laptop was "Russian disinformation". With all their considerable resources, they knew perfectly well that it was genuine and the information it contained detailing Biden family criminality was real, but they lied that it was not, in order to protect Biden before the election.

That is perhaps the most egregious political scandal in American history, and must result in nothing less than the disbandment of the organizations involved.

BTW regarding Nixon / Watergate, LBJ was known to have spied on Barry Goldwater in 1964 [URL]https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-fbi-spied-lbjs-campaign[/URL].

But because LBJ was in favor of the nascent Globohomo Agenda which had just begun (the Immigration Act to destroy the country demographically; the "Great Society" to normalize welfare gibsmedats and single motherhood; the start of affirmative action, etc) he was given a pass, as all leftists are.

Indeed, elements of the FBI actually spied for him, showing that the rot in that organization began a long time ago.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2793810]So Matt Added Taibbi, didn't say this? "There's no evidence that I've seen of any government involvement in the laptop story. " [URL]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/twitter-files-matt-taibbi-bari-weiss-michael-shellenberger-elon-musk/[/URL].

Kinda blows your "all of the alphabet agencies lied" about the laptop thing, doesn't it?[/QUOTE]Taibbi was not the one doing the Hunter Biden laptop story. Michael Schllenberger was, and I actually underestimated how bad it was.

[URL]https://public.substack.com/p/fbi-members-of-congress-respond-to[/URL]

Just like MSNBC should be known as spook network for all the former spies it has hired, Twitter and Facebook are loaded to the gills with presumably "former" FBI, NSA etc agents.

[URL]https://twitter.com/NameRedacted247[/URL]

After learning that Twitter employs at least 15 former FBI agents, I searched Facebook. What I found is alarming.

Facebook currently employs at least 115 people, in high-ranking positions, that formerly worked at FBI / CIA / NSA / DHS:

17 CIA.

37 FBI.

23 NSA.

38 DHS.

Google currently employs at least 165 people, in high-ranking positions, from the Intelligence Community.

Google's Trust & Safety team is managed by 3 ex-CIA agents, who control "misinfo & hate speech. ".

Here's the breakdown:

CIA-27.

FBI-52.

NSA-30.

DHS-50.

ODNI-6.

Oh right, these are "former" agents and a "private" company. Yeesh. I have learned that many of these "former" employees are still getting benefits from their "former" employers.

If this is not censorship, then nothing is. If you watch the 3 minute video at the above link and get the facts and tell me that the FBI did not censor the Hunter Biden story, then you are not an American who believes in the Constitution. At this point, it is unarguable that this is censorship.

But if you are a Democratic douche, this is a non-story because Biden won.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2793659]Can I ask. What do you mean by heritage American? I never heard the expression before.

And what did gay folk do to you that got you so angry with them? I don't like classical music, but I don't feel the need to insult people that do like it at every opportunity.

I don't think you are necessarily old-fashioned, just missing out.[/QUOTE]TK, he says globohomo. I am not speaking for Chris but I would imagine he agrees with this. There is this excellent and popular show called Breaking Point with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. She is a liberal, and he is conservative, and you would be amazed at how much they agree.

Bernie Sanders proposed making community college free. He was blown off as stupid and we were told we could not afford it when in fact it would cost $80 billion a year. We have already spent $100 billion on Ukraine for a war that we provoked with Russia. The globohomo agenda is funded by Wall Street and the military industrial complex to make certain money keeps coming to them by distracting from the real issues where Republicans and Democrats would agree. A bill that government pays for college will NEVER be voted on in my lifetime because Wall Street banks make too many $ off the loans, but a vote on military aid to Ukraine was a sure thing.

Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell have made disgusting amounts of money trading stocks on insider information. There will NEVER be a bill sent for a vote to ban Congressional insider trading in my lifetime, but you better believe they will pass some bill regarding hate speech.

With health care and the defense industry, you will NEVER see a bill sent for a vote on a public option of Medicare for all. I will also NEVER see an audit of the defense industry in my lifetime. However, you will see plenty of bills and laws aimed at limiting production of fossil fuels to "save the planet".

The Democratic douches here are like the cult members of true believers. Instead of empowering the people even with voting, they do not care about that. They only care if Democrats win. If the FBI rigs an election ot two, they are cool with that. As long as the Democratic douches subscribe to the globohomo agenda, issues like soaring education costs, Congressional insider trading, health care, and the out of control defense department will continue to be problems.

For all the shit said about Trump, he kept the peace. If he were re-elected, there would not have been a war in Ukraine. Instead of recognizing that, we see Democratic douches wearing their yellow and blue lapels and criticizing anyone who questions the end game in Ukraine or questions spending $100 billion earmarked for killing people as a Putin puppet.

Cheering on war and demonizing the man who would have prevented it is part of the globohomo agenda. As long as they can keep red and blue bickering, the money will keep rolling in.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793858]
As for homosexuals, I am opposed to their public sodomy parades but most of all their targeting of children for grooming with the ultimate goal of legalizing pedophilia (see my previous post).[/QUOTE]Thanks for your reply Chris.

Then to home in a little on your dislike -.
- you don't like public sodomy.
- you don't like child grooming.

But I fail to understand why you hold a prejudice against gay folks then. Bcos:
- many gay people do not commit public sodomy nor child grooming; whereas.
- many non-gay people do commit public sodomy and child grooming.

So you should direct your grievance against sodomizers and child groomers in general, not against gay folk.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793925]

Cheering on war and demonizing the man who would have prevented it is part of the globohomo agenda.[/QUOTE]Then I misuderstand what globohomo means. I thought he was against the global gay rights movement.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2793862]Yes, in fact they didn't even believe the laptop was "Russian disinformation". With all their considerable resources, they knew perfectly well that it was genuine and the information it contained detailing Biden family criminality was real, but they lied that it was not, in order to protect Biden before the election.

That is perhaps the most egregious political scandal in American history, and must result in nothing less than the disbandment of the organizations involved.

BTW regarding Nixon / Watergate, LBJ was known to have spied on Barry Goldwater in 1964 [URL]https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-fbi-spied-lbjs-campaign[/URL].

But because LBJ was in favor of the nascent Globohomo Agenda which had just begun (the Immigration Act to destroy the country demographically; the "Great Society" to normalize welfare gibsmedats and single motherhood; the start of affirmative action, etc) he was given a pass, as all leftists are.

Indeed, elements of the FBI actually spied for him, showing that the rot in that organization began a long time ago.[/QUOTE]Your guy, Matt Taibbi, said the following: "There's no evidence — that I've seen — of any government involvement in the laptop story. " [URL]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/twitter...ger-elon-musk/.[/URL] [B]Period[/B].

But you, on the other hand, continue to make BS statements like "With all their considerable resources, they knew perfectly well that it was genuine and the information it contained detailing Biden family criminality was real, but they lied that it was not, in order to protect Biden before the election. " All without proof, of course. But wingers don't need proof, do they? That's why it is so easy to be a winger. Everything is "fake news" that doesn't come from some unsubstantiated blog some where.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793915]Taibbi was not the one doing the Hunter Biden laptop story. Michael Schllenberger was, and I actually underestimated how bad it was.

[URL]https://public.substack.com/p/fbi-members-of-congress-respond-to[/URL]

Just like MSNBC should be known as spook network for all the former spies it has hired, Twitter and Facebook are loaded to the gills with presumably "former" FBI, NSA etc agents.

[URL]https://twitter.com/NameRedacted247[/URL]

After learning that Twitter employs at least 15 former FBI agents, I searched Facebook. What I found is alarming.

Facebook currently employs at least 115 people, in high-ranking positions, that formerly worked at FBI / CIA / NSA / DHS:

17 CIA.

37 FBI.

23 NSA..[/QUOTE]Does your rant make Taibbi's statement untrue? Or is it untrue because it throws cold water on your bullshit. The fact that Taibbi said that there was no government involvement says that what you are saying is bullshit with a capital 'be'.

You are aghast that former employees of the CIA, FBI etc. Are still receiving benefits but you are unsurprisingly silent about Donnie the Dumbass offering PAC-or-somebody-else-paid-for legal assistance to folks who were about to testify to the Jan 6th committee.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793663]When you go into Bagdad Bob mode, Tooms, we know you have admitted defeat.

Laptop bit was total crap? LOL.[/QUOTE]Absolutely total crap. The laptop bit has not yet been shown by anyone or by any evidence that Joe Biden, you know, the candidate and winner of the 2020 presidential election, was involved in anything illegal or unethical. Zip. Nada. Nothing.

You want to bust Hunter Biden for smoking crack and getting a footjob from an. Asian hooker? Go for it. Spend millions in tax payer's money keeping the Redrawn Districts Pink Tinkle busy prosecuting it for the next 21 months.

Actually, that might be better for the country than what they could be doing for the next 21 months anyway.

Nobody proves that the USA dollars in your pocket and in your bank account are not really "yours" better than elected members of the Repub Party.

Since when was Faux News in the news business? As everyone knows, they are in the Lies Business, Donnie boy.

[B]Trump doubles down on attacks on Rupert Murdoch and tells him to get out of the news business over Fox News Dominion testimony[/B]

[URL]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-rupert-murdoch-dominion-fox-news-b2292163.html[/URL]

[QUOTE]Mr. Mutdoch has admitted during a sworn deposition that Fox News hosts pushed the fact-free narrative that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Mr Trump, a recent filing in the voting machine company Dominion Voting Systemss billion-dollar lawsuit against Fox shows.[/QUOTE]And its biggest, most blatant liar is Tucker Carlson:

[B]Tucker Carlson Tried to Get Fox News Reporter Fired for Fact-Checking Trump Internal emails reveal the hosts motives for lying.[/B]

[URL]https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/02/tucker-carlson-wanted-to-fire-reporter-who-corrected-trump.html[/URL]

[QUOTE]Later that night, Carlson pointed Hannity to a tweet by Fox reporter Jacqui Heinrich, which fact-checked a tweet by Trump that mentioned Dominion voting conspiracy theories. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised, she wrote.

Please get her fired, Carlson texted Hannity and Ingraham. Seriously What the fuck? Im actually shocked. It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. Its measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down.
Not a joke."[/QUOTE]My god. The dripping contempt Murdoch, Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, et al have for the idiots who believe the utter bullshit Faux News shovels down their throats is itself nauseating and sad.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793925]TK, he says globohomo. I am not speaking for Chris but I would imagine he agrees with this. There is this excellent and popular show called Breaking Point with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. She is a liberal, and he is conservative, and you would be amazed at how much they agree.

Bernie Sanders proposed making community college free. He was blown off as stupid and we were told we could not afford it when in fact it would cost $80 billion a year. We have already spent $100 billion on Ukraine for a war that we provoked with Russia. The globohomo agenda is funded by Wall Street and the military industrial complex to make certain money keeps coming to them by distracting from the real issues where Republicans and Democrats would agree. A bill that government pays for college will NEVER be voted on in my lifetime because Wall Street banks make too many $ off the loans, but a vote on military aid to Ukraine was a sure thing.

Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell have made disgusting amounts of money trading stocks on insider information. There will NEVER be a bill sent for a vote to ban Congressional insider trading in my lifetime, but you better believe they will pass some bill regarding hate speech...[/QUOTE]The USA was actively engaged in a foreign war for every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every week of every month of every year of the Trump so-called presidency.

Is that how he "kept the peace"?

Oh sure, if Trump had been re-elected he and the presumed re-elected RePutinKlan Party in Congress would likely have blocked all pro democracy military aid for Ukraine and, "Bingo", no need for Putin to go to war in order to score a big win for authoritarian dictatorships and the defeat of democracy.

Trump sure did his best to score a big win for an authoritarian dictatorship and the defeat of democracy in America, didn't he? Putin must be so proud of his ass-licking lackey's attempt. Except he failed.

Thanks, Joe.

I do hope you don't mind if Joe Biden and the rest of us push back with a little law and order to prevent that from happening. And, if push comes to shove, it might very well require a bit of military force to defend the Constitution against further cop-killing attacks from your beloved RePutinKlan Party.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793915]Taibbi was not the one doing the Hunter Biden laptop story. Michael Schllenberger was, and I actually underestimated how bad it was.

[URL]https://public.substack.com/p/fbi-members-of-congress-respond-to[/URL]

Just like MSNBC should be known as spook network for all the former spies it has hired, Twitter and Facebook are loaded to the gills with presumably "former" FBI, NSA etc agents.

[URL]https://twitter.com/NameRedacted247[/URL]

After learning that Twitter employs at least 15 former FBI agents, I searched Facebook. What I found is alarming.

Facebook currently employs at least 115 people, in high-ranking positions, that formerly worked at FBI / CIA / NSA / DHS:

17 CIA.

37 FBI.

23 NSA.

38 DHS.

Google currently employs at least 165 people, in high-ranking positions, from the Intelligence Community.

Google's Trust & Safety team is managed by 3 ex-CIA agents, who control "misinfo & hate speech. ".

Here's the breakdown:

CIA-27.

FBI-52.

NSA-30.

DHS-50.

ODNI-6.

Oh right, these are "former" agents and a "private" company. Yeesh. I have learned that many of these "former" employees are still getting benefits from their "former" employers.

If this is not censorship, then nothing is. If you watch the 3 minute video at the above link and get the facts and tell me that the FBI did not censor the Hunter Biden story, then you are not an American who believes in the Constitution. At this point, it is unarguable that this is censorship.

But if you are a Democratic douche, this is a non-story because Biden won.[/QUOTE]Okay, went through the your link and paid attention to each an every clip, read everything provided on the link.

Clips contains mostly FOX news crediting one source and never a collaborating source or any other guest other than Michael Shellenberger. Sure there was on British lady who got on then to credit Michael Shelleberger. Then Tucker credited the journalism that was done by M. Shellenberger.

I checked Michael Shellenger's linkedin. Graduated from Earlham College with a BA in Peace and Global Studies ([URL]https://earlham.edu/academics/majors-minors-programs/peace-and-global-studies[/URL]) and a MA in Anthropology.

No mentioning of any journalism school, nor wrote for any publication that you could identify. I'll do that for you as of December 2022, he wrote for "The Free Press" media company. Without looking can you find the website?

Best part about your link, right in the middle between paragraphs.

"My investigative reporting depends on paid subscribers like you. Act now and get a full year for just $7. 50/ month. " This is how a grift is built.

Lastly, your disdain for democrats, how could you possibly be able trust this democrat's writing? [URL]https://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/sov/2018-primary/sov/31-governor.pdf[/URL] (page 34).

I write this only to demonstrate drilling down on information and searching, rather than REGURGITATE. Take some time to look into any story written or a reported story. ALWAYS be skeptical, but do a little homework. When two opposing sides, ex. FOX and MSNBC share the same report, you have a more accurate report. When you don't these are opinions. Regan once said, "Trust, but verify". Which is rather funny considering it was used during nuclear discussions with the Soviet. Funny because "Trust, but verify" is a Russian proverb.

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2792720][b]Political dog whistle.[/b] Why the sudden interest in test scores in a particular city? Interest in a certain laptop computer or Hillary Klingon's server and emails waning? But wait. KKKarlson has gobs of videos of citizens strolling through Das Kapital. Not interested in classified documents roaming Willy Nilly or impending criminal indictments?[/QUOTE]

Your question w/r to why the dog-whistles are being aimed at the city of Baltimore, is an interesting one. Not really sure, but it does seem to get targeted a lot and gets it fare share of right-wing Repub/MAGA bashing.

Take for example, the right-Wing Neo-Nazi Atomwaffen leader and girlfriend duo, targeted and wanted to attack and blow-up, about five (5) power sub-stations, located in a ring around Baltimore, Maryland, all in the same day.

[b]Neo-Nazi Leader Planned Baltimore Power-Grid Attack, DOJ Says...[/b]
[URL]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-02-06/neo-nazi-leader-planned-baltimore-power-grid-attack-doj-says [/URL]

Their intentions were to cause a cascading effect, the would completely engulf the city, a blackout and mayhem and then presumably, ignite some sort of racially motivated "race war".

In the [b]last 4-months, there have been nine (9) attacks [/b]on electrical sub-stations have occurred in 3-different states. Homeland Security have, advised right-wing domestic violence extremists, have developed credible and specific plans to attack our electricity infrastructure since 2020.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2794076]Since when was Faux News in the news business? As everyone knows, they are in the Lies Business, Donnie boy.

[B]Trump doubles down on attacks on Rupert Murdoch and tells him to get out of the news business over Fox News Dominion testimony[/B]
[URL]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-rupert-murdoch-dominion-fox-news-b2292163.html[/URL][/QUOTE]The Clown Show that is Foxy Muse and Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf just gets more hilarious. As if Rupert Murdoch, is going to take business advice from the grifter wannabe billionaire.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2794076]And its biggest, most blatant liar is Tucker Carlson:

[B]Tucker Carlson Tried to Get Fox News Reporter Fired for Fact-Checking Trump Internal emails reveal the hosts motives for lying.[/B]
[URL]https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/02/tucker-carlson-wanted-to-fire-reporter-who-corrected-trump.html[/URL][/QUOTE]Agreed! Fucker Carlson, is tops when it comes to such utter garbage he spews and wanting to "own the libs" with his two-face "woke" and "cancel culture" hypocrisy.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2794076]My god. The dripping contempt Murdoch, Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, et al have for the idiots who believe the utter bullshit Faux News shovels down their throats is itself nauseating and sad.[/QUOTE]Yep, definitely bears repeating. Also worth repeating is that very fact that, Foxy Muse, is nothing more than a Republican/MAGA state owned right-wing media outlet.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2794059]Absolutely total crap. The laptop bit has not yet been shown by anyone or by any evidence that Joe Biden, you know, the candidate and winner of the 2020 presidential election, was involved in anything illegal or unethical. Zip. Nada. Nothing.

You want to bust Hunter Biden for smoking crack and getting a footjob from an. Asian hooker? Go for it. Spend millions in tax payer's money keeping the Redrawn Districts Pink Tinkle busy prosecuting it for the next 21 months.[/QUOTE]So the Hunter Biden laptop story being censored had no effect on the election? Bullshit!

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2794052]Does your rant make Taibbi's statement untrue?[/QUOTE]Taibbi's statement was true when he made it. The volume of Twitter files is massive, and Taibbi was not the only one involved in releasing Twitter file findings. He had not seen that the Hunter Biden laptop information when he made the statement you keep clinging to. Schellenberger did the Hunter Biden part of the Twitter files. You seem not to understand facts, PVM, and Taibbi is not on your side.

Taibbi recently tweeted, "The people determined to reduce the Twitter Files into a partisan pissing match are doing so precisely because the real targets of these stories aren't parties, but the FBI, DHS, DOD, and other massive state entities who've been improperly meddling in domestic speech. ".

Exactly. Democratic douches do not care about civil rights for all Americans. And they do not give a shit about the Constitution. It would be best if Republicans did not have civil rights at all. All you douches care about is if Democrats win.

The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored to give Joe Biden a better chance of winning. It was censorship and rigging an election. Period.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794115]Okay, went through the your link and paid attention to each an every clip, read everything provided on the link.

Clips contains mostly FOX news crediting one source and never a collaborating source or any other guest other than Michael Shellenberger. Sure there was on British lady who got on then to credit Michael Shelleberger. Then Tucker credited the journalism that was done by M. Shellenberger.

I checked Michael Shellenger's linkedin. Graduated from Earlham College with a BA in Peace and Global Studies ([URL]https://earlham.edu/academics/majors-minors-programs/peace-and-global-studies[/URL]) and a MA in Anthropology.

No mentioning of any journalism school, nor wrote for any publication that you could identify. I'll do that for you as of December 2022, he wrote for "The Free Press" media company. Without looking can you find the website?[/QUOTE]So my finding his website and Shellenberger's degree are what matter? This is classic Dem behavior: attack the source rather than dispute the facts. A reporter wants to get paid for his work? The horror! He needs to be paid like everyone else, with commercials by Pfizer.

The facts are Hunter Biden dropped off his laptop to be repaired and did not pick it up. The owner of the repair shop made copies of Hunter's hard drive. He gave one to the FBI. They sat on it and did nothing with it. Instead they followed around Rudy Giuliani who had a copy of the drive as well. When Giuliani talked to the NY Post, the FBI told the media to be concerned that there was going to be a story on Hunter Biden that had "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation". The NY Post writes the story. Facebook and Twitter either ban or downgrade this story. And we then learn that the FBI is in constant talks with Twitter and even has a encrypted and top secret line to discuss spiking stories or banning people from its platform. We also see Democratic members in Congress getting people banned all the time.

So the FBI let Hillary Clinton go after she broke the law. You had Peter Strzok like the #3 guy at the FBI say that he would not let Trump win the 2016 election. The FBI then makes up Russiagate. With 1-6, the FBI refuses to admit if they had agents involved responsible for instigating the 1-6 riots. Now we see that the FBI rigged the 2020 election by doing all it could to sit on Hunter Biden's laptop and spike the NY Post story about it.

Your nonpartisan explanation, Checkmate, was that Twitter is a "private company" and therefore cannot violate censorship laws. Obviously, Texas would have gone after Twitter for political discrimination had Musk not bought them. Then we learn that this "private company" is stocked to the gills with "former" FBI agents.

And now the issue is Shellenberger's degree, website, asking to be paid for his work, and that he told his story on Fox News? And there is no dispute of what he claims are the facts? Congratulations, you have now been crowned a Democratic douche, Mr. Nonpartisan. You are about as "nonpartisan" as the FBI.

This is classic censorship and election rigging. Hell, the FBI has unquestionably influenced the last three elections, but you do not care that the FBI is picking candidates versus the voters as long as they lean Dem.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2794059]The laptop bit has not yet been shown by anyone or by any evidence that Joe Biden, you know, the candidate and winner of the 2020 presidential election, was involved in anything illegal or unethical. Zip. Nada. Nothing.[/QUOTE]And Bagdad Bob strikes again.

Gilliar had referenced the "big guy" as he acted as the driving force behind Hunter and his uncle Jim Biden's planned multimillion-dollar deal with Chinese energy conglomerate CEFC. [URL]https://nypost.com/2022/07/27/hunter-bidens-biz-partner-called-joe-biden-the-big-guy-in-panic-over-laptop/[/URL].

[URL]https://heavy.com/news/tony-bobulinski/[/URL]

"I take great pride in the time my family and I served this country. I am also not a political person. What few campaign contributions I have made in my life were to Democrats."

May 20,2017 text exchange obtained by #FoxNews. Tony Bobulinski is warned by business partner James Gilliar "Don't mention Joe being involved, it's only when you are face to face, I know you know that but they are paranoid", which I'm told is a reference to Joe Biden.

The email, sent from one of the group partners, disclosed cash and equity positions, as well as a 10% cut for someone called "the big guy," the New York Post reported.

In his announcement, Bobulinski outed "the big guy" as Joe Biden. He also told the New York Post that the initials "JB" used in the email represent Joe Biden's brother, Jim Biden.

Tony Bobulinski, former business partner of the Biden family, claimed Tuesday that the president's son and brother cheated him out of millions of dollars in a deal to form a joint venture with a Chinese firm.

The former Navy officer's accusations involve a contract initiated between a Delaware firm he started, owned by him, Jim and Hunter Biden, and partners Rob Walker and James Gilliar, to create a joint venture with CEFC, the Chinese firm that pledged to give them $10 million of working capital. Bobulinski alleged that the Bidens embezzled at least $5 million from CEFC.

The outline for the deal with China was on Hunter's laptop.

End of links. In addition, Hunter Biden was being paid millions by a Ukrainian natural gas company, and he has no knowledge of the natural gas business and admitted he was hired on name only. Joe Biden comes in and holds up American aid until the Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Hunter is fired.

So your contention that Hunter Biden was not unethically profiting off the Biden name and selling political influence is bunk.

Bagdad Bob by your definition anyone who is a member of the Democratic party cannot be involved in anything illegal or unethical.

Maybe you should go back to your whatabouism versus outright lies. If you say what about Jared Kushner, you have a point, but unlike you who loves Hunter Biden selling political influence for a $, I think what Kushner did was unethical.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2794375]So my finding his website and Shellenberger's degree are what matter? This is classic Dem behavior: attack the source rather than dispute the facts. A reporter wants to get paid for his work? The horror! He needs to be paid like everyone else, with commercials by Pfizer.

The facts are Hunter Biden dropped off his laptop to be repaired and did not pick it up. The owner of the repair shop made copies of Hunter's hard drive. He gave one to the FBI. They sat on it and did nothing with it. Instead they followed around Rudy Giuliani who had a copy of the drive as well. When Giuliani talked to the NY Post, the FBI told the media to be concerned that there was going to be a story on Hunter Biden that had "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation". The NY Post writes the story. Facebook and Twitter either ban or downgrade this story. And we then learn that the FBI is in constant talks with Twitter and even has a encrypted and top secret line to discuss spiking stories or banning people from its platform. We also see Democratic members in Congress getting people banned all the time.

So the FBI let Hillary Clinton go after she broke the law. You had Peter Strzok like the #3 guy at the FBI say that he would not let Trump win the 2016 election. The FBI then makes up Russiagate. With 1-6, the FBI refuses to admit if they had agents involved responsible for instigating the 1-6 riots. Now we see that the FBI rigged the 2020 election by doing all it could to sit on Hunter Biden's laptop and spike the NY Post story about it.

Your nonpartisan explanation, Checkmate, was that Twitter is a "private company" and therefore cannot violate censorship laws. Obviously, Texas would have gone after Twitter for political discrimination had Musk not bought them. Then we learn that this "private company" is stocked to the gills with "former" FBI agents.

And now the issue is Shellenberger's degree, website, asking to be paid for his work, and that he told his story on Fox News? And there is no dispute of what he claims are the facts? Congratulations, you have now been crowned a Democratic douche, Mr. Nonpartisan. You are about as "nonpartisan" as the FBI.

This is classic censorship and election rigging. Hell, the FBI has unquestionably influenced the last three elections, but you do not care that the FBI is picking candidates versus the voters as long as they lean Dem.[/QUOTE]1. Yes, when there is one person who is producing the all information, I do look at it critically and ask; Who is this person? Is he credible? Is there collaborating evident by someone else?

Your choice to blindly accept things at face value is your right. I choose to do a little more homework.

2. "The facts are Hunter Biden dropped off his laptop to be repaired and did not pick it up. The owner of the repair shop made copies of Hunter's hard drive. He gave one to the FBI. They sat on it and did nothing with it. Instead they followed around Rudy Giuliani who had a copy of the drive as well. When Giuliani talked to the NY Post, the FBI told the media to be concerned that there was going to be a story on Hunter Biden that had "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation". The NY Post writes the story. . . . We also see Democratic members in Congress getting people banned all the time. ".

Okay repair shop made two copies, Rudy and FBI. Rudy talked to NY POST, and FBI was concerned that it could be Russian disinformation. NY POST wrote the story anyway. So that story was out there by a news media. As well, since Rudy had a copy, couldn't he completely release it in any other forum beside Facebook or Twitter, you know like [URL]https://rudygiulianics.com/[/URL] or Fox News, or any of the thousand websites; blogs; etc. Yet the FBI somehow muzzled the universe, but you were able to get the information.

Yes, congress members are allowed to request businesses to remove individuals for their own personal reasons. As can you, and me and god forbid the President of United States. Businesses then make a judgement call.

Your grievance is that if people knew about this the election would have changed. You don't account for: maybe they have seen it but don't give a shit about it; and / or maybe they like the other candidate better for other reasons; and / or maybe they voted for non of the above.

Fact: People vote however they want.

Opinion: Mine: And that's how it should be. May the best person wins.

3. You're still stuck on Hilary. Fact: No charges were filed, as of yet.

"You had Peter Strzok like the #3 guy at the FBI say that he would not let Trump win the 2016 election. ".

Stupid move on his part, not illegal considering he's not charged with anything. He was fired because he probably violated a FBI policy. I used "probably" because he currently is contesting his firing in court for wrongful termination. Sorry, I don't have the FBI employee policy. I'll just have to watch the court system and see how that played out.

FBI refuse to admit to "some report" that "someone" wrote on the internet. [URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/-trump-protester-ray-epps-told-jan-6-committee-crazy-conspiracy-theori-rcna63615[/URL].

DO yourself a favor, write to your favorite (maybe you live in an area where your representative doesn't share your view point) congressional representative to hold a hearing on this, and let's see what they write back to you.

4. "Texas would have gone after Twitter for political discrimination had Musk not bought them. ".

And if they, it would have been a slam dunk that they would win in court. Right?

Fact: Every lawsuits based on political discrimination against social media has been dismissed by the court, so far. It is NOT a THING.

5. Throwing shit against the wall and tell people to dispute it is dumb. I don't have issue with Shellenberger writing per se. I ask for corroborating evident other than his. It seems strange that you don't allow this kind curiosity.

6. So the FBI decides our elections. By extension, shouldn't every president get relected? The President can fire and hire anyone and everyone in the FBI each 4 years.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2794379]And Bagdad Bob strikes again.

Gilliar had referenced the "big guy" as he acted as the driving force behind Hunter and his uncle Jim Biden's planned multimillion-dollar deal with Chinese energy conglomerate CEFC. [URL]https://nypost.com/2022/07/27/hunter-bidens-biz-partner-called-joe-biden-the-big-guy-in-panic-over-laptop/[/URL].

[URL]https://heavy.com/news/tony-bobulinski/[/URL]

"I take great pride in the time my family and I served this country. I am also not a political person. What few campaign contributions I have made in my life were to Democrats."

May 20,2017 text exchange obtained by #FoxNews. Tony Bobulinski is warned by business partner James Gilliar "Don't mention Joe being involved, it's only when you are face to face, I know you know that but they are paranoid", which I'm told is a reference to Joe Biden.

The email, sent from one of the group partners, disclosed cash and equity positions, as well as a 10% cut for someone called "the big guy," the New York Post reported.

In his announcement, Bobulinski outed "the big guy" as Joe Biden. He also told the New York Post that the initials "JB" used in the email represent Joe Biden's brother, Jim Biden..[/QUOTE]That's right. There is no law, nothing, zip, zero, nada, for which someone can be indicted or charged for presumably and possibly being referred to as "the big guy" by someone trying to impress a potential employer and to whom no illegal favors or payments were ever made.

Now you're getting it!

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794459]1. Yes, when there is one person who is producing the all information, I do look at it critically and ask; Who is this person? Is he credible? Is there collaborating evident by someone else?

Your choice to blindly accept things at face value is your right. I choose to do a little more homework.[/QUOTE]LOL. The problem is not my reading comprehension. It is your imagination. Elon Musk saw these files. He gave them to independent journalists he trusted. No one is disputing the facts except you, and you are not even disputing the facts. You are disputing whether he is qualified to publish said facts. You cannot fight the what so you are gong after the who.

Bottom line is the FBI is not disputing the facts, but you are, and what does that say about you? Hell, you probably still believe Russiagate was real.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794459]FBI was concerned that it could be Russian disinformation. NY POST wrote the story anyway. So that story was out there by a news media. As well, since Rudy had a copy, couldn't he completely release it in any other forum beside Facebook or Twitter, you know like [URL]https://rudygiulianics.com/[/URL] or Fox News, or any of the thousand websites; blogs; etc. Yet the FBI somehow muzzled the universe, but you were able to get the information.[/QUOTE]When you say the FBI was concerned it was Russian information, I can just stop. You have your nose so far up the FBI's ass you cannot see them for what they are.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794459]Yes, congress members are allowed to request businesses to remove individuals for their own personal reasons. As can you, and me and god forbid the President of United States. Businesses then make a judgement call.[/QUOTE]So members of Congress can censor but Congress as a whole cannot?

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794459]Your grievance is that if people knew about this the election would have changed. You don't account for: maybe they have seen it but don't give a shit about it[/QUOTE]I never said it would have changed the election. I said the last three elections have been rigged by the FBI. I do not know what would have happened if they quit rigging them.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794459]Fact: People vote however they want.

Opinion: Mine: And that's how it should be. May the best person wins.

3. You're still stuck on Hilary. Fact: No charges were filed, as of yet.

"You had Peter Strzok like the #3 guy at the FBI say that he would not let Trump win the 2016 election. ".

Stupid move on his part, not illegal considering he's not charged with anything. He was fired because he probably violated a FBI policy. I used "probably" because he currently is contesting his firing in court for wrongful termination. Sorry, I don't have the FBI employee policy. I'll just have to watch the court system and see how that played out.[/QUOTE]It looks like Tooms has some competition for the Bagdad Bob role. Obviously, in your eyes, the way the Hiliary Clinton matter was handled was law enforcement at its finest. I am not going to debate someone who is making stuff up and is so dumb as to believe the FBI's tale about Russian disinformation with Hunter's laptop.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2794699]
.....
It looks like Tooms has some competition for the Bagdad Bob role. Obviously, in your eyes, the way the Hiliary Clinton matter was handled was law enforcement at its finest. I am not going to debate someone who is making stuff up and is so dumb as to believe the FBI's tale about Russian disinformation with Hunter's laptop.[/QUOTE]Now that irony has died among wingers, I suppose it is up to me to remind you that Baghdad Bob's laughable silliness was that he reported a false and rosy picture of what was happening in Iraq during the Iraq War despite the actual, verifiable facts to the contrary.

You know, exactly like when wingers proudly proclaim Trump "kept the peace!" despite the actual, verifiable fact to the contrary that the USA was actively engaged in war for every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every week of every month of every year of Trump's so-called presidency.

Um. The condition of the USA not being actively engaged in a war anywhere on the planet, otherwise known as "Peace", occurred for the first time in decades under Joe Biden, not Donald Trump.

Baghdad much there, Bob?

Oh, and the investigation of Trump's extraordinary and troubling devotion and allegiance to Russia over America and our allies was totally justified and legitimate.

Trump's own assigned invesigation into the matter proved that:

[B]How the Durham inquiry backfired to show weaponization of Trump DoJ[/B]

[URL]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/feb/10/donald-trump-fbi-durham-investigation[/URL]

And what you lovingly refer to as "Russiagate" was also very good and beneficial for America, too! As witnessed by the outcome of the 2020 presidential election and keeping that Redrawn Districts Repub election rigging down to a historically pathetic Pink Tinkle in the 2022 midterms.

Good job, America!

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2794699]LOL. The problem is not my reading comprehension. It is your imagination. Elon Musk saw these files. He gave them to independent journalists he trusted. No one is disputing the facts except you, and you are not even disputing the facts. You are disputing whether he is qualified to publish said facts. You cannot fight the what so you are gong after the who.

Bottom line is the FBI is not disputing the facts, but you are, and what does that say about you? Hell, you probably still believe Russiagate was real.

When you say the FBI was concerned it was Russian information, I can just stop. You have your nose so far up the FBI's ass you cannot see them for what they are.

So members of Congress can censor but Congress as a whole cannot?

I never said it would have changed the election. I said the last three elections have been rigged by the FBI. I do not know what would have happened if they quit rigging them.

It looks like Tooms has some competition for the Bagdad Bob role. Obviously, in your eyes, the way the Hiliary Clinton matter was handled was law enforcement at its finest. I am not going to debate someone who is making stuff up and is so dumb as to believe the FBI's tale about Russian disinformation with Hunter's laptop.[/QUOTE]1.

"I am honored by the invitation and grateful for the opportunity to offer testimony to Congress next week on the abuses of power and threats to freedom of expression that the Twitter Files revealed. " Shellenberger -twitter.

So he will have his time for members to ask him questions regarding this.

See unlike you, I wait for the answers. When it is all said and done, the facts are what they are, and I can accept that. You take things at face value, get led by the nose, and then get bent out of shape if the end result doesn't match what your mind determined it should be at the begining.

2. "Instead they followed around Rudy Giuliani who had a copy of the drive as well. When Giuliani talked to the NY Post, the FBI told the media to be concerned that there was going to be a story on Hunter Biden that had "all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation". " Post #12099.

I repeated your words as a summation. Case in point, Reading Comprehension.

3.

Yes, last checked individual members are also "individual citizens". Nowhere in that paragraph was "congress as a whole" or "censor" was mentioned. Reading Comprehension / imagination.

4.

My fault, I attributed what Chris said to you. You have not made that assertion.

5.

I thought my sentence was brief enough to make simple statement of letting go of something that didn't happen. Here it is again, You are stuck on Hilary.

The statement did not opine on how the case was handle. Merely stated that case is, as of now, closed.

The FBI assessment is they tried to warn the american public that Russia was sowing doubt and division among the american citizen by any means, Hunter's laptop just happened to be the shining object at the time for them to exploit. Did the Russian know about the laptop was in that shop, and that the dude made copies because drugged out Hunter didn't pick it up? Probably not. But they also knew that if they made this a "thing", maybe they can have Americans argued about it and potentially divides itself, and better yet fight with one another, figuratively and literally.

The FBI affirmed this assessment in the previous administation, and the current administration maintains that stance. I'll take assessment as that, until proven otherwise. Nothing about make anything up to argue with you. You don't trust the FBI. That's cool, that's your opinion and your privilege as a citizen.

My stance has always been Businesses can do whatever they want within the parameters of the law.

Anyone who break the law should be held to account, through the judicial process. This shouldn't be controversial. You're just impatient.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794863]1.

"I am honored by the invitation and grateful for the opportunity to offer testimony to Congress next week on the abuses of power and threats to freedom of expression that the Twitter Files revealed. " Shellenberger -twitter.

So he will have his time for members to ask him questions regarding this.

See unlike you, I wait for the answers.[/QUOTE]You mean you have no clue what Shellenberger said in the Twitter files because you did not read one damned word he wrote.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794863]I repeated your words as a summation. Case in point, Reading Comprehension.[/QUOTE]Yes, and you understood none of it. The FBI got Hunter Biden's laptop from an American citizen. You are too dense to see the FBI made up all that Russian disinformation bullshit to censor the story.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794863]Yes, last checked individual members are also "individual citizens". Nowhere in that paragraph was "congress as a whole" or "censor" was mentioned. Reading Comprehension / imagination.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.carnegielibrary.org/the-first-amendment-and-censorship/[/URL]

"The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers. ".

Like with the Twitter files, you checked nothing.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794863]I thought my sentence was brief enough to make simple statement of letting go of something that didn't happen. Here it is again, You are stuck on Hilary.[/QUOTE]No, I am stuck on the FBI. Bleaching files? Having the FBI versus the AG decide to prosecute or not? The AG having a closed door meeting with a former president who might have offered up a prize in case she did not prosecute and then taking herself off the case? Oh yeah, that was all business as usual with the FBI and Democrats.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794863]The FBI assessment is they tried to warn the american public that Russia was sowing doubt and division among the american citizen by any means, Hunter's laptop just happened to be the shining object at the time for them to exploit. Did the Russian know about the laptop was in that shop, and that the dude made copies because drugged out Hunter didn't pick it up? Probably not. But they also knew that if they made this a "thing", maybe they can have Americans argued about it and potentially divides itself, and better yet fight with one another, figuratively and literally.[/QUOTE]Are you doing PR for the FBI?

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794863]Anyone who break the law should be held to account, through the judicial process. This shouldn't be controversial.[/QUOTE]Right, it is not like the FBI treated Hiliary Clinton and Biden differently than Trump.

Checkmate, just curious, do you have any clue what the purpose of the first amendment is?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2794970]You mean you have no clue what Shellenberger said in the Twitter files because you did not read one damned word he wrote.

Yes, and you understood none of it. The FBI got Hunter Biden's laptop from an American citizen. You are too dense to see the FBI made up all that Russian disinformation bullshit to censor the story.

[URL]https://www.carnegielibrary.org/the-first-amendment-and-censorship/[/URL]

"The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers. ".

Like with the Twitter files, you checked nothing.

No, I am stuck on the FBI. Bleaching files? Having the FBI versus the AG decide to prosecute or not? The AG having a closed door meeting with a former president who might have offered up a prize in case she did not prosecute and then taking herself off the case? Oh yeah, that was all business as usual with the FBI and Democrats.

Are you doing PR for the FBI?

Right, it is not like the FBI treated Hiliary Clinton and Biden differently than Trump.

Checkmate, just curious, do you have any clue what the purpose of the first amendment is?[/QUOTE]Everything with you is confirmation bias-based.

The "twitter files" show what you want them to show because you have blocked out everything that doesn't confirm your opinion.

Let the Repubs investigate all they want. Any Twitter files investigation will be a nothing-burger. Repub investigators come up with nothing more than the Durham Report did. You remember that, don't you? The Durham Report? The report that took two years to produce and was supposed to bring down the deep state and the swamp and all the rest. The Durham Report went over like the lead balloon that it was. It was a nothing-burger. Just like the Hunter Biden laptop story will be a nothing-burger. Just like every single thing that the wingers will investigate until the next election. A big nothing-burger.

Great clip of Bernie in UK.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgoPQS1kBUw[/URL]

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2794970]You mean you have no clue what Shellenberger said in the Twitter files because you did not read one damned word he wrote.

Yes, and you understood none of it. The FBI got Hunter Biden's laptop from an American citizen. You are too dense to see the FBI made up all that Russian disinformation bullshit to censor the story.

[URL]https://www.carnegielibrary.org/the-first-amendment-and-censorship/[/URL]

"The First Amendment only protects your speech from government censorship. It applies to federal, state, and local government actors. This is a broad category that includes not only lawmakers and elected officials, but also public schools and universities, courts, and police officers. ".

Like with the Twitter files, you checked nothing.

No, I am stuck on the FBI. Bleaching files? Having the FBI versus the AG decide to prosecute or not? The AG having a closed door meeting with a former president who might have offered up a prize in case she did not prosecute and then taking herself off the case? Oh yeah, that was all business as usual with the FBI and Democrats.

Are you doing PR for the FBI?

Right, it is not like the FBI treated Hiliary Clinton and Biden differently than Trump.

Checkmate, just curious, do you have any clue what the purpose of the first amendment is?[/QUOTE]Unlike you, I know when to say enough is enough. I shall used my blocking feature now. Good luck on your twitter hunt.

Here's a quote that [B]perfectly[/B] sums up FUX Snooze: "It's now just about impossible to argue Fox is a legitimate journalistic entity. The now-public communications highlight that [B]the network believes its primary purpose is to spoon-feed carefully curated propaganda to its audience[/B] — not to deliver news. ".

This quote sums it up perfectly. I'd have said "all bullshit all the time" but that's my perspective. FUX Snooze does have a few people who sort of have integrity but they are being drowned out by the "hosts" (Carlson, Ingraham, Hannity and the like) who know that FUX Snooze viewers are idiots and have said so in private.

Of course, the Repubs on the board will, as usual, trash the source. [URL]https://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-executives-discussed-plan-211019570.html[/URL].

[QUOTE=Spidy;2794159]
Take for example, the right-Wing Neo-Nazi Atomwaffen leader and girlfriend duo, targeted and wanted to attack and blow-up, about five (5) power sub-stations, located in a ring around Baltimore, Maryland, all in the same day.
[/QUOTE]ROFL, sure. What actually happened, as in the Gretchen Whitmer "kidnap" hoax and the Jan 6 hoax, is that federal agents deliberately targeted a handful of doofuses, whipped them up into a frenzy, set them up with money and gear, then swooped on them.

They used to do this quite a bit with American Muslims 15 years ago. The media noticed and reported on it. But now that it's white men who are being targeted, the fake news of course turns a blind eye.

In the sensible and law-governed America of the past, that would have been rightly thrown out of court and the agents fired if not prosecuted themselves for politically-motivated entrapment.

But this is not the America of old. This is the America of the Jewish Attorney-General Merrick Garland, who set the feds on parents concerned about their elementary age children. The America of Kamala Harris, who cheered on a leftist mob that attacked the White House, while feigning shock over the Jan 6 nothingburger.

The Guardian newspaper, of all outlets, admitted that the leader of this "neo-nazi" movement has a CAGE code! That is a code you require in order to be paid by the federal government.

"Was the Base a honeypot designed to entrap people?

Beginning in 2009 and until as late as 2019, Nazzaro billed himself as an intelligence expert working with various government and military agencies.

Nazzaro is the principal of an LLC called Omega Solutions International (OSI), a company offering a range of intelligence and security contracting.

Its website, which was removed from the Internet some time after August 2019, boasted of the firm's "experience conducting intelligence analysis for government agencies, military organizations, and private businesses", as well as access to a network of seasoned security professionals with expertise in counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, homeland security, hostage rescue / negotiations, psychological operations, and more.

The firm also has a Cage Code, which is an administrative requirement for military and government contractors. ".

The "leader" of this so-called "neo-nazi" movement has a Cage code in order to be paid by the feds. Let that sink in.

Meanwhile, the actual violent terrorism that actually happens (mass burning and looting of cities) is committed entirely by leftists, cheered on by the media and democrat leaders, while the feds do nothing about it.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2793925]TK, he says globohomo. I am not speaking for Chris but I would imagine he agrees with this. There is this excellent and popular show called Breaking Point with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. She is a liberal, and he is conservative, and you would be amazed at how much they agree.

Bernie Sanders proposed making community college free. He was blown off as stupid and we were told we could not afford it when in fact it would cost $80 billion a year. We have already spent $100 billion on Ukraine for a war that we provoked with Russia. The globohomo agenda is funded by Wall Street and the military industrial complex to make certain money keeps coming to them by distracting from the real issues where Republicans and Democrats would agree. A bill that government pays for college will NEVER be voted on in my lifetime because Wall Street banks make too many $ off the loans, but a vote on military aid to Ukraine was a sure thing.

Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell have made disgusting amounts of money trading stocks on insider information. There will NEVER be a bill sent for a vote to ban Congressional insider trading in my lifetime, but you better believe they will pass some bill regarding hate speech.

With health care and the defense industry, you will NEVER see a bill sent for a vote on a public option of Medicare for all. I will also NEVER see an audit of the defense industry in my lifetime. However, you will see plenty of bills and laws aimed at limiting production of fossil fuels to "save the planet".

The Democratic douches here are like the cult members of true believers. Instead of empowering the people even with voting, they do not care about that. They only care if Democrats win. If the FBI rigs an election ot two, they are cool with that. As long as the Democratic douches subscribe to the globohomo agenda, issues like soaring education costs, Congressional insider trading, health care, and the out of control defense department will continue to be problems.

For all the shit said about Trump, he kept the peace. If he were re-elected, there would not have been a war in Ukraine. Instead of recognizing that, we see Democratic douches wearing their yellow and blue lapels and criticizing anyone who questions the end game in Ukraine or questions spending $100 billion earmarked for killing people as a Putin puppet.

Cheering on war and demonizing the man who would have prevented it is part of the globohomo agenda. As long as they can keep red and blue bickering, the money will keep rolling in.[/QUOTE]A reasonably good definition of Globohomo at urbandictionary: "(noun, can also be used as an adjective) A portmanteau of the words "global" (or "globalist") and "homosexual. " Used to sarcastically denote the predominant philosophy espoused by the Western economic elite, formally known as "neoliberalism". It combines ruthless capitalism by transnational corporations with a façade of socially-liberal politics.

The ultimate end state of Globohomo is one in which all sexual, ethnic, racial and national identity is broken down, leaving the demoralized masses to work for $12 an hour in an Amazon warehouse while a small cadre of billionaires rule over them. A poignant vision of Globohomo can be found in Aldous Huxley's 1932 novel, "Brave New World". ".

It leaves out the frankly satanic ferocity with which Globohomo attempts to indoctrinate and sexualize small children (perhaps a plan hatched between Bill Gates and the Clintons on Epstein Island) but is broadly correct.

Of course, first world white people in general are far wealthier than third worlders, due to our higher IQ, creativity, organization and industry. It is therefore white people whose living standards must be brought down most sharply to make them part of the vast, globalized, demoralised, impoverished mass. And our countries that must be invaded to bring us down to third world levels.

Excellent point about the cost of the Ukraine war.

Why do we even care about a border skirmish in the former USSR? They happen all the time. There was one just before this war, between Armenia and Azerbaijan (both former soviet republics). Nobody knew or cared about it. They only reason it got any coverage at all was because the Kardashians are Armenian and they heavily publicized it.

One thing I will say about Medicare is that it could never work with open borders. The British National Health Service has been completely overrun by the vast number of immigrants pouring into the country. You literally have to wait years for a standard operation. For it to work, it would have to be restricted to US citizens only, otherwise it would be just another magnet to attract even more useless low IQ turd world dipshits that the Biden regime and deep state just wave across the border.

As for college loans, yes indeed it is a big Wall Street scam: another element of the deep state profiteering at the expense of Americans. Tucker Carlson made yet another excellent point on this: the universities should also be held liable if their student doesn't repay the loan.

Right now, the universities are letting in any doofus regardless of whether he or she can realistically graduate and find employment, because it's free money for them (money which is filtered back to the democrat party and various globohomo agendas by woke leftist academia). If the universities were on the hook for these loans, they would think much harder about which students they let in, and which bullshit "intersectional gender white privilege gibsmedat theory" courses they would cut.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2794459]
Okay repair shop made two copies, Rudy and FBI. Rudy talked to NY POST, and FBI was concerned that it could be Russian disinformation. NY POST wrote the story anyway. So that story was out there by a news media. As well, since Rudy had a copy, couldn't he completely release it in any other forum beside Facebook or Twitter, you know like [URL]https://rudygiulianics.com/[/URL] or Fox News, or any of the thousand websites; blogs; etc. Yet the FBI somehow muzzled the universe, but you were able to get the information.
[/QUOTE]Firstly, the FBI knew perfectly well it had nothing to do with Russia. Your suggestion that the poor, helpless, hapless little FBI had no idea what was going on is entirely laughable. The feds had had the laptop for some time and were certain that it was authentic, as we all now know. That they hid this fact for political reasons is one of the reasons the organization needs to be disbanded.

Secondly, yes, the fact is that information distribution has become so dominated by Twitter, Facebook and Google that if those organizations collude (with, disgracefully, the politicized FBI) to ban and block something it has little chance of getting out to the wider public. They are the new public square. Which is why the First Amendment must be enforced upon them for it to have any meaning.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2795217]The Durham Report? [/QUOTE]Unfortunately, when Durham brought prosecutions they took place in Washington DC, which is 95% democrat and full of swamp creatures. So the jurors were picked from a tainted pool, and knew they had to acquit no matter what.

This is indicative of the arrogance of the globohomo deep state swamp and its followers. They no longer consider themselves beholden to law, and act only to further their own power and attack and hurt their enemies (heritage Americans). This is a problem which cannot be fixed short of drastic action.

Fascinating investigation about Israeli hacking, disinformation and election-meddling:

[URL]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/15/revealed-disinformation-team-jorge-claim-meddling-elections-tal-hanan[/URL]

"A team of Israeli contractors who claim to have manipulated more than 30 elections around the world using hacking, sabotage and automated disinformation on social media has been exposed in a new investigation. The unit is run by Tal Hanan, a 50-year-old former Israeli special forces operative.

Hanan told the undercover reporters that his services, which others describe as "black ops", were available to intelligence agencies, political campaigns and private companies that wanted to secretly manipulate public opinion. He said they had been used across Africa, South and Central America, the US and Europe.

One of Team Jorge's key services is a sophisticated software package, Advanced Impact Media Solutions, or Aims. It controls a vast army of thousands of fake social media profiles on Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Telegram, Gmail, Instagram and YouTube. Some avatars even have Amazon accounts with credit cards, bitcoin wallets and Airbnb accounts.

Hanan appears to have run at least some of his disinformation operations through an Israeli company, Demoman International, which is registered on a website run by the Israeli Ministry of Defense to promote defence exports.

Hanan described his team as "graduates of government agencies", with expertise in finance, social media and campaigns, as well as "psychological warfare".

In his initial pitch to the potential clients, Hanan claimed: "We are now involved in one election in Africa. We have a team in Greece and a team in the Emirates. You follow the leads. We have completed 33 presidential-level campaigns, 27 of which were successful. " Later, he said he was involved in two "major projects" in the US".

Wow. Quite a read.

Here we have clear evidence of Israeli international hacking, disinformation and election-meddling carried out by individuals and organizations with strong links to the Israeli government.

And yet you will notice the story is from a month ago. Have you heard anything about it since? In the New York Times? On CNN?

Do you think if such a vast, well-organized hacking, disinformation and election-meddling network had been exposed in Russia with links to the Russian government, the media would have been so strangely quiet? Hell, they've been talking about things like this in Russia without any evidence. Even The Guardian hasn't published any follow-up om the Israel story.

Almost as if some very powerful people who control finance and media got it shut down.

Remind me, who owns and runs the majority of finance and media in the US? I believe Kanye West mentioned it recently. Whatever happened to him?

Just in case people were confused about all this "Drag Queen story hour" stuff, the sexualization of children by leftists via "gender identity" classes which are kept hidden from parents, seeing children castrated and having healthy breasts cut off, and wondering the underlying reason beneath the skin of the Globohomo Agenda, here are a couple of stories which perhaps shed a little light:

[URL]https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/03/california-legislature-passes-bill-reduce-penalties-oral-anal-sex-willing-children/[/URL]

"California lawmakers led by Jewish senator Scott Weiner passed a bill Monday that would reduce penalties for adults who have oral or anal sex with a willing minor child".

[URL]https://nypost.com/2023/03/03/accused-pedo-mayor-patrick-wojahn-called-pete-buttigieg-his-buddy/[/URL]

"Patrick Wojahn, the gay Maryland mayor busted on charges of possessing child pornography Thursday has had a longtime mentor-mentee relationship with President Biden's embattled Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. Former College Park Mayor Wojahn, 47, has credited Buttigieg's "mentorship" with helping him advance his career in interviews. ".

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2796370]Here's a quote that [B]perfectly[/B] sums up FUX Snooze: "It's now just about impossible to argue Fox is a legitimate journalistic entity. The now-public communications highlight that [B]the network believes its primary purpose is to spoon-feed carefully curated propaganda to its audience[/B] not to deliver news. ".

This quote sums it up perfectly. I'd have said "all bullshit all the time" but that's my perspective. FUX Snooze does have a few people who sort of have integrity but they are being drowned out by the "hosts" (Carlson, Ingraham, Hannity and the like) who know that FUX Snooze viewers are idiots and have said so in private.

Of course, the Repubs on the board will, as usual, trash the source. [URL]https://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-executives-discussed-plan-211019570.html[/URL].[/QUOTE]Now that the whole decades long Fux "News" scam has gone down in flames in a historic epic fail, we see the sucker wingers who believed the bullshit that and its wannabe copy bullshit winger sources shoveled down their eager throats while the rest of the world laughed at them have abandoned ship and are now seeking out even goofier, more ridiculous bullshit to believe in.

"Globohomoism" is it now?

Lololol.

P. T. Barnum way under-estimated the frequency.

These studies say it all. Although the studies are somewhat old (6 and 12 years old), they identify why conservatives are so fearful.

"Most societies are divided into a party that wants change (the more liberal party) and one that is afraid of change (the conservatives). The liberal party is generally more intellectual and the conservative party is more anti-intellectual.

The conservative party is big on national defense and magnifies our perception of threat, whether of foreign aggressors, immigrants, terrorists, or invading ideologies like Communism. To a conservative, the world really is a frightening place. " [URL]https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-beast/201104/conservatives-big-fear-brain-study-finds[/URL].

And "Beyond differences in personality traits (see Table 1), the literature emphasizes differences in sensitivity and reactivity to negative stimuli, threat, and disgust between those on the extremes of a political conservative-liberal axis. Political conservatives, compared with political liberals, are more likely to interpret, attend to, remember, and respond to negative aspects of environmental stimuli, especially if they are novel and different. This "negativity bias" is evident in studies showing that political conservatism compared with liberalism is associated with greater, faster, and longer attentional focusing on negative images and greater physiological measures of arousal to them. Political conservatives compared with political liberals have a greater sense of threat from the same stimuli and show larger physiological responses to ambiguous stimuli. Political conservatives compared with political liberals are also more prone to respond with disgust to various situations, particularly if they violate a sense of purity. " [URL]https://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.neuropsych.16030051[/URL].

We see these traits every time a conservative posts and every time a liberal posts. Conservatives continually post about hating everything that's "different" and they continually post about negative things. And politicians like Donnie the Dumbass and Ron DeathSantis know how to play to the things that their base fears.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2795217]Everything with you is confirmation bias-based.

The "twitter files" show what you want them to show because you have blocked out everything that doesn't confirm your opinion.[/QUOTE]Well, you are right that Twitter pre-Elon Musk was doing things that so many people were complaining about Twitter, that there was some confirmation bias of their censorship, but if you think you scored with that, then you missed the point. It was the extent of censorship from so many government agencies that was so staggering.

And the both siders you douches like to criticize are not your base. No for you douches, the base is a bunch of slugs collecting government checks and pensions. The Dems, who have to work for a living and deal with real bureaucratic bullshit, have long worshipped Matt Taibbi's honesty and integrity. And after resisting for so long, he and people like Glenn Greenwald have had to go onto Fox to be interviewed to be heard.

So while you douches are after something burgers which I guess means putting people in jail, law enforcement took a huge hit that you may not have noticed. And that is after their talking a huge hit for the 1-6 tapes given to Tucker Carlson, [URL]https://nypost.com/2023/03/07/jan-6-footage-shows-doj-court-focused-on-shamans-costume-not-crime/[/URL].

In short, why was LE seeing if people were violating Twitter's terms of service versus being concerned with people actually breaking the law? Isn't people breaking the law what LE is all about? That was something a Republican Congressman asked these two "so called journalists". The journalists were asked if there was anything about breaking the law or illegal activity that was seen? And the answer was the government agencies never mentioned illegal activity in all their requests.

In general, Republicans are pro law enforcement so it is going to take incident after incident for them to see the FBI for what it is, a partisan apparatus. And now that they control the House, the Republicans are going to be scrutinizing every dime the FBI gets. This is not going to make splashy headlines, so you can blow it off as a nothing burger, but the Twitter files hearing had a hugely negative impact on these government agencies and the hacks the Democrats put up to protect said agencies failed horribly.

Still, even in a week with the Twitter Files and 1-6 tapes, this was the story of the week: The House voted unanimously Friday to declassify USA Intelligence information about the origins of COVID-19, a sweeping show of bipartisan support near the third anniversary of the start of the deadly pandemic.

The 419-0 vote was final approval of the bill, sending it to President Joe Biden's desk to be signed into law. End of story.

I am sure to you that this is a big nothing burger as well but to me, it is a reading of the tea leaves with regards to China, the 2024 election, and the bureaucracy running things.

More from the DVS (Dominion Voting Systems) lawsuit proceedings...

On Nov 8th, 2020, Maria Bartiromo, had Trump's lawyer Sidney Powell on as a guest, to share her earth shattering evidence on how the election was stolen. Turns out, the night before Sidney Powell forwarded an email to Ms. Bartiromo, from her "source", the person who she based her gigantic claims of election fraud on.

Now get this, in the email, Sidney Powell's loony, nutjob, cuckoo bananas source, claims she got the the information from [b]"the wind"[/b], as she explains:

[i]"It's more like time-travel in a semi-conscious state ... [b]The Wind tells me ... I'm a ghost"[/b][/i] and that [i]"I was in a car accident in 1992 ... I was internally decapitated ... and yet, I continue to walk the earth."[/i]

[b]Meet the Ghost Woman Fox Relied on for Voter Fraud Claims[/b]
[url]https://www.thedailybeast.com/meet-the-ghost-minnesota-artist-fox-relied-on-for-voter-fraud-claims [/url]

This is the right-wing lunacy, bonkers, nutjob and banana republic, the Repubs have turned into and it won't matter who the fuck is driving this short bus.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2797278]These studies say it all. Although the studies are somewhat old (6 and 12 years old), they identify why conservatives are so fearful. ...

We see these traits every time a conservative posts and every time a liberal posts. Conservatives continually post about hating everything that's "different" and they continually post about negative things. And politicians like Donnie the Dumbass and Ron DeathSantis know how to play to the things that their base fears.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. For the wingers, it always the [b]"boogeyman" coming to get ya![/b]

Or in modern day terms (as in the past, although the list today has expanded), the Conservatives would have you believe, it's the Jews, the gays/LGBTQ, the Women, the Blacks, the Latinos, the Native Indians, the Muslims, the Asians, the immigrants...etc, are all coming to get ya.

Is there a minority group that they don't target? How do you think Hitler came to power?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2797633]
In short, why was LE seeing if people were violating Twitter's terms of service versus being concerned with people actually breaking the law? Isn't people breaking the law what LE is all about? That was something a Republican Congressman asked these two "so called journalists". The journalists were asked if there was anything about breaking the law or illegal activity that was seen? And the answer was the government agencies never mentioned illegal activity in all their requests.
[/QUOTE]Real law enforcement, ie locally elected sheriffs directly answerable to the people in their district, are indeed concerned with people breaking the law. Unfortunately, the FBI and the rest of the alphabet agencies are not law enforcement; they are Swamp defenders.

Their purpose is to protect The Agenda (open borders / Great Replacement, faggotry, feminism, anti-white hate, anti-Christian hate, rigged mail-in "elections", etc: we all know the drill by now). This is why they must be disbanded.

A dumbass.

To show you have absolutely dumb he is, now he's blaming Mike Pence for January 6th because if Mike had gone along with Donnie's cockamamie plan there would have been no violence. [URL]https://news.yahoo.com/trump-blames-mike-pence-jan-221444807.html[/URL].

The really sad part is that many charter members of the moron brigade ALREADY FEEL THIS WAY.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2797680]More from the DVS (Dominion Voting Systems) lawsuit proceedings...

On Nov 8th, 2020, Maria Bartiromo, had Trump's lawyer Sidney Powell on as a guest, to share her earth shattering evidence on how the election was stolen. Turns out, the night before Sidney Powell forwarded an email to Ms. Bartiromo, from her "source", the person who she based her gigantic claims of election fraud on.

Now get this, in the email, Sidney Powell's loony, nutjob, cuckoo bananas source, claims she got the the information from [b]"the wind"[/b], as she explains:

[i]"It's more like time-travel in a semi-conscious state ... [b]The Wind tells me ... I'm a ghost"[/b][/i] and that [i]"I was in a car accident in 1992 ... I was internally decapitated ... and yet, I continue to walk the earth."[/i]

[b]Meet the Ghost Woman Fox Relied on for Voter Fraud Claims[/b]
[url]https://www.thedailybeast.com/meet-the-ghost-minnesota-artist-fox-relied-on-for-voter-fraud-claims [/url]

This is the right-wing lunacy, bonkers, nutjob and banana republic, the Repubs have turned into and it won't matter who the fuck is driving this short bus.[/QUOTE]The RePutinKlan Party is all about State Run Media.

While he was pressuring Twitter to self-censor negative tweets about him, so-called president Trump was also literally directing the Fake News Bullshit shoveled down the open, eager and accepting throats of Fux News' winger viewers:

[B]Trump would make aides call Fox to complain about poor coverage and get them to fix it, ex-press secretary says[/B]

[URL]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-fox-news-stephanie-grisham-b2299150.html[/URL]

[QUOTE]"We did work hand in hand with Fox News. And that came at the president's direction," she said. "If he didnt like something, we would immediately call Fox and have them fix it or try to make a news story out of it."[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2797663]I thought you had that one figured out Chris? Or did the butt-sex talk confuse you?[/QUOTE]Lots of interesting points here Chris:
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmbfS6DsvNo[/URL]

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2797692]You didn't answer the question. What is a woman?[/QUOTE]There are several definitions. My own opinion is that a woman is a person that believes they are a woman, and is not a man that is certified as insane. Similar definition for a man. That leaves some grey area, and these would be non-binary. Or certified insane.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2797746]Do you accept the definition of "woman" as "adult human female"? A simple yes or no will do.[/QUOTE]Biologically, sure, why not?

Are you really so confused, aggrieved and aggravated over what to do about pronouns in the English language that it has turned your world view upside down and inside out?

Poor thing. Do you know that the word for boyfriend and girlfriend is the same in the Thai language?

If you lived here you might have needed to be talked down off the ledge several times by now over just that one issue.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2797824]There are several definitions.[/QUOTE]LOL.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2797824] My own opinion is that a woman is a person that believes they are a woman[/QUOTE]Believes they are a what? That is a circular definition.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2797824] and is not a man that is certified as insane.[/QUOTE]The fact that a man thinks he is a woman or vice versa defines him or her as insane. This insanity was called gender dysphoria and was recognised till a few years ago when Globohomo Swamp ZOG Clownworld got their fangs into the American Psychiatric Association and forced them to change it from "mental illness" to "stunning and brave".

But I must admit, this is why I prefer JustTK to the standard dem douches. They will obfuscate and avoid the question because they know how ridiculous their leftist dogma looks. JustTK answers honestly, regardless how wacky.

Anyway, I'll leave it to Troy McClure to explain reality on this matter:

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2797867]Biologically, sure, why not?

Are you really so confused, aggrieved and aggravated over what to do about pronouns in the English language that it has turned your world view upside down and inside out?

Poor thing. Do you know that the word for boyfriend and girlfriend is the same in the Thai language?

If you lived here you might have needed to be talked down off the ledge several times by now over just that one issue.[/QUOTE]Not really. The word "lover" can be used by men or women. Rather different from targeting children with tranny propaganda then chopping their dicks and tits off.

But given your, ahem, "fluid" stance on this matter, I'm starting to realize why you decided to live in Thailand. No hate here buddy. You do you. Just leave the kids out of it.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2797824]There are several definitions. [/QUOTE]No, a definition is definitive. A woman is an adult female. Period. And a rose by any other name is still a rose.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2797824]My own opinion is that a woman is a person that believes they are a woman[/QUOTE]Belief should have nothing to do with definitions, and the notion an adult female and adult male who thinks they are a woman are the same is insane. Trans men need a name, and they can pick whatever name they want to call themselves, but woman is off limits.

The problem with when you go fooling around with existing definitions of words is tyranny is so easily accomplished. When words and definitions are subjected to opinion, the value of law is quickly eroded, and tyranny is all but ensured.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2798080]Not really. The word "lover" can be used by men or women. [B]Rather different from targeting children with tranny propaganda then chopping their dicks and tits off.[/b]

But given your, ahem, "fluid" stance on this matter, I'm starting to realize why you decided to live in Thailand. No hate here buddy. You do you. Just leave the kids out of it.[/QUOTE]Insanity ought to be redefined to include you thinking any such legislation, law or government supported movement is doing what your fever dream nightmares apparently conjured up all on their own.

Here's a better questiion that actually pertains to real legislation and real laws and a real movement that authoritarian Big Big Big Government wingers want to force upon real people;.

What is a baby?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2798255]Insanity ought to be redefined to include you thinking any such legislation, law or government supported movement is doing what your fever dream nightmares apparently conjured up all on their own.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619823/Detransitioner-Chloe-Cole-slams-breast-removal-op-endured-aged-15-child-protection-appeal.html[/URL]

"Cole, 18, said she was coerced into taking puberty blockers and having both breasts surgically removed when she was 15, and warned of other minors being misdiagnosed and pushed into similar operations. "

Faced with the factual reality above, do you withdraw your previous comment?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2799041][URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619823/Detransitioner-Chloe-Cole-slams-breast-removal-op-endured-aged-15-child-protection-appeal.html[/URL]

"Cole, 18, said she was coerced into taking puberty blockers and having both breasts surgically removed when she was 15, and warned of other minors being misdiagnosed and pushed into similar operations. "

Faced with the factual reality above, do you withdraw your previous comment?[/QUOTE]"They kind of watered it down", said a girl who voluntarily chose breast removal at age 15 and that is your long, long, long researched evidence that some mysterious group is [B]targeting children with tranny propaganda then chopping their dicks and tits off[/B]?

Seriously?

[B]"They are literally chopping off the private parts of young kids."[/B] - Said Mega Liar Donald Trump wannabe Ron DeSantis.

MOSTLY FALSE.

[URL]https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/aug/10/ron-desantis/transition-related-surgery-limited-teens-not-young/[/URL]

[QUOTE]We found no examples of "young kids" receiving transition-related surgery. The Florida Department of Health differentiates between children - under 10 - and adolescents - between 10 and 18. DeSantis' office provided PolitiFact with two cases involving adolescents.
....
That is not true under any existing medical guidelines," said Dr. Jack Turban, assistant professor of child and adolescent psychiatry at the University of California, San Francisco. "No medical or surgical interventions are considered for prepubertal children."

The governor's office sent PolitiFact two examples of people who received transition-related surgeries in their mid to late teenage years one at 15 and one at 17. DeSantis' Florida Department of Health differentiates between children (under 10) and adolescents (10-18).[/QUOTE]BTW, what is a baby?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2796388]Firstly, the FBI knew perfectly well it had nothing to do with Russia. Your suggestion that the poor, helpless, hapless little FBI had no idea what was going on is entirely laughable. The feds had had the laptop for some time and were certain that it was authentic, as we all now know. That they hid this fact for political reasons is one of the reasons the organization needs to be disbanded.

Secondly, yes, the fact is that information distribution has become so dominated by Twitter, Facebook and Google that if those organizations collude (with, disgracefully, the politicized FBI) to ban and block something it has little chance of getting out to the wider public. They are the new public square. Which is why the First Amendment must be enforced upon them for it to have any meaning.[/QUOTE]"That they hid this fact for political reasons is one of the reasons the organization needs to be disbanded. ".

You said reasons, what are the others?

"Which is why the First Amendment must be enforced upon them for it to have any meaning. ".

Spin it how you want, to advocate that a government throw a person in jail; or company in jail for publishing or not publishing opinions, thoughts, facts, is against the 1st Amendment you are fighting to protect.

You are advocating that the GOVERNMENT forces certain businesses to publish stuff on their website, and that they can not regulate themselves.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2799041][URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619823/Detransitioner-Chloe-Cole-slams-breast-removal-op-endured-aged-15-child-protection-appeal.html[/URL]

"Cole, 18, said she was coerced into taking puberty blockers and having both breasts surgically removed when she was 15, and warned of other minors being misdiagnosed and pushed into similar operations. "

Faced with the factual reality above, do you withdraw your previous comment?[/QUOTE]If that family was deceived by the physician, they should sue the hell out of that doctor.

What is convoluted about this discussion is using buzz words to make a point. "Genital Mutulations".

Total (mastectomy with prior gender dysphoria diagnosis) is 282 between age 13-17 in 2021. [URL]https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/[/URL] Under subtitle "Top Surgeries".

Total number of breast augmentation between age 13-19 in 2020 is 3233 [URL]https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2020/cosmetic-procedures-ages-13-19-2020.pdf[/URL].

No 2021 data, and the age is 2 years of "adulthood" so that will skewed the data. Assuming 90% are between 18-19, you still have over 300 underage augmentations. This is why artificial creating crisis usinging buzz words is so bad. It isn't about genital mutulations, it is about elected surgeries that people get. Parental consents before adult age is how these surgeries are legally performed.

As for people who regret that they had surgeries, LIFE decisions are very important.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2799248]
"Which is why the First Amendment must be enforced upon them for it to have any meaning. ".

Spin it how you want, to advocate that a government throw a person in jail; or company in jail for publishing or not publishing opinions, thoughts, facts, is against the 1st Amendment you are fighting to protect.

You are advocating that the GOVERNMENT forces certain businesses to publish stuff on their website, and that they can not regulate themselves.[/QUOTE]Nobody need be thrown in jail. As Big Tech are platforms not publishers according to Section 230, large fines can be levied on them, increasing steeply with each infraction. Soon these fines will reach tens or hundreds of millions. If they are unpaid, the platform itself will be seized by the government, as is the case with a house on which fees and taxes are unpaid for a long period of time, and will be auctioned off to a new owner.

I'm confident that the owners of Big Tech would rather ensure First Amendment rights than potentially face hundreds of millions in fines and the ultimate loss of their platforms.

Alternatively, they may forego Section 230 protections, declare themselves publishers, and leave themselves open to legal action over anything written or said on them.

What they cannot keep doing is pretending to be neutral platforms while censoring and pushing woke Globohomo leftist Agenda.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2799871]hat they cannot keep doing is pretending to be neutral platforms while censoring and pushing woke Globohomo leftist Agenda.[/QUOTE]Yeah, look at this nonsense called the Great Virality project.

[URL]https://twitter.com/mtaibbi[/URL]

Taibbi wrote, "I dutifully got the vaccine and all boosters. The Virality Project (VP) shows a clear desire to deamplify or cover up true stories of side effects and is the first thing I've read that's made me think twice about the shot. Trying to force trust, they had the opposite effect."

4. All were characterized as "potential violations" or disinformation "events" by the Virality Project, a sweeping, cross-platform effort to monitor billons of social media posts by Stanford University, federal agencies, and a slew of (often state-funded) NGOs.

31. The Virality Project was specifically not based on "assertions of fact," but public submission to authority, acceptance of narrative, and pronouncements by figures like Anthony Fauci. The project's central / animating concept was, "You can't handle the truth. "

33. "This continual process of seeding doubt and uncertainty in authoritative voices," Graphika wrote, in a report sent to Twitter, "leads to a society that finds it too challenging to identify what's true or false. ".

35. A Cleveland Clinic study showed previous infection offered the "same immunity" as the vaccine, but VP said discovery was susbservient to narrative: "Whether or not. Scientific consensus is changing, 'natural immunity' is a key narrative. Among anti-vaccine activists. ".

34. For this reason, the CDC-partnered project focused often on disinformation "events" involving Fauci, saying "release of Fauci's emails foments distrust," and deriding assertions he "misled the public. ".

30. Even in its final report, VP claimed it was misinformation to suggest the vaccine does not prevent transmission, or that governments are planning to introduce vaccine passports. Both things turned out to be true.

24. The VP in April 2021 mistakenly described "breakthrough" infections as "extremely rare events" that should not be inferred to mean "vaccines are ineffective. ".

26. A few months later: "Breakthrough cases are happening. "

21. VP warned against people "just asking questions," implying it was a tactic "commonly used by spreaders of misinformation. " It also described a "Worldwide Rally for Freedom planned over Telegram" as a disinformation event.

20. The Virality Project helped pioneer the gauging of "disinformation" by audience response. If the post-vaccine death of a black woman named Drene Keyes in Virginia went unnoticed inspired mostly "anti-vaccine" comments on local media, it became a "disinformation" event.

16. VP routinely framed real testimonials about side effects as misinformation, from "true stories" of blood clots from AstraZeneca vaccines to a New York Times story about vaccine recipients who contracted the blood disorder thrombocytopenia.

14. VP told Twitter that "true stories that could fuel hesitancy," including things like "celebrity deaths after vaccine" or the closure of a central NY school due to reports of post-vaccine illness, should be considered "Standard Vaccine Misinformation on Your Platform. "

Add this all up and what you have is a government backed initiative with NGOs and Stanford spreading massive misinformation, downplaying the risk of Covid vaccines, exaggerating their benefits, and all while, big pharma racks up huge $. This is a horrific example of the damage censorship can do.

And poor Matt is back up in Congress and the Dems are hammering him instead of those people lying about Covid and the vaccine. I actually think Covid is going to be a big issue in 2024. The fact that the lab leak and China were downplayed because of dollars thrown at the Biden family and the fact that Desantis and not Trump stood up to these full of shit, dictatorial, medical bureaucrats.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2799871]Nobody need be thrown in jail. As Big Tech are platforms not publishers according to Section 230, large fines can be levied on them, increasing steeply with each infraction. Soon these fines will reach tens or hundreds of millions. If they are unpaid, the platform itself will be seized by the government, as is the case with a house on which fees and taxes are unpaid for a long period of time, and will be auctioned off to a new owner.

I'm confident that the owners of Big Tech would rather ensure First Amendment rights than potentially face hundreds of millions in fines and the ultimate loss of their platforms.

Alternatively, they may forego Section 230 protections, declare themselves publishers, and leave themselves open to legal action over anything written or said on them.

What they cannot keep doing is pretending to be neutral platforms while censoring and pushing woke Globohomo leftist Agenda.[/QUOTE]Both, political and hate speech are equally protected. If hate speech is protected under the 1st amendment, and any private ("platform") businesses can prevent those under their own rules and guidelines, would the government fine these businesses and seize their companies as well? You, Chris P or me, can't pick and choose which speech should be allowed and disallowed by private companies.

You would be okay with a government taking over private businesses? This sounds a lot like third world dictatorship stuff than capitalism.

Even if you assume that the government can levy fines on this situation, you wouldn't think a "Big Tech" company would fight this in court?

For better or for worse, big businesses, unlike the average american, have more leverage and deeper pocket to fight these.

And it is the plantiff (s) which has to prove that they have been harmed, which is steep hill to climb. Who would be the plantiff (s)?

Not a single case has made its way to the Supreme Court regarding First Amendment against ANY Social Media companies. This is why I see this as non event.

[URL]https://www.zerohedge.com/political/700-nypd-riot-cops-mobilized-steel-barriers-deployed-ahead-potential-trump-arrest[/URL]

700 NYPD Riot Cops Mobilized, Steel Barriers Deployed Ahead Of Potential Trump Arrest.

The New York Police Department (NYPD) has mobilized 700 riot cops and deployed steel barricades around the Manhattan Criminal Court in anticipation of civil disorder, should the Manhattan District Attorney's office order the arrest of former President Donald Trump, following a potential grand jury indictment for allegedly paying a former porn star for her silence ahead of his 2016 presidential campaign.

We have a case against Trump by a Soros backed New York the who literally lets criminals off with a slap on the wrist prosecuting a six year old federal charge that is beyond the statue of limitations. This charge was already looked into by the Feds and blown off, and the the's star witnesses are a felon and a porn star.

And so here we go again. You can just imagine what the Democratic douches will say, "It is the law" when in truth there is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump paid the porn star and when it comes to the law and Democrats, they miraculously are never prosecuted.

The larger point though that the Democratic douches miss is now when Trump runs, you are no longer voting for Trump but against the swamp and for elections where voters and not Soros backed DAs choose who is president.

If you want us to believe the 2020 election was the fairest in history, ha ha, then the Dems should be welcoming Trump running again. The fact that they are pulling this legal crap just shows me what chicken shit cowards they really are, and that they believe that this time they cannot fix an election like the last one.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2799041][URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11619823/Detransitioner-Chloe-Cole-slams-breast-removal-op-endured-aged-15-child-protection-appeal.html[/URL]

"Cole, 18, said she was coerced into taking puberty blockers and having both breasts surgically removed when she was 15, and warned of other minors being misdiagnosed and pushed into similar operations. "

Faced with the factual reality above, do you withdraw your previous comment?[/QUOTE]How is this factual reality? The Daily Mail is not the most reliable source and it has a history of publishing inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research, so I would not point to it to assert that something is true.

This is a one-sided story in which you never hear from the other side. For all you know, Chloe Cole finds it more worthwhile now to be the poster child for conservatives against gender-affirming care that she is misrepresenting her position about the sex-change operation when she was about to undergo it.

Seems like that Elvis' "700 NYPD Riot Cops" thingy has only been reported by lunatic media so far, but honestly, I don't understand why NYPD shouldn't be prepared to deal with a potentially savage mob after what they did in DC. Does anyone really have any doubts about Trump's stormtroopers' propensity for violence?

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2800415]How is this factual reality? The Daily Mail is not the most reliable source and it has a history of publishing inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research, so I would not point to it to assert that something is true.[/QUOTE]Uh sorry, After Russiagate, Hunter Biden's laptop, and the fiascos with Covid, you dumb Dems do not get to say your sources are superior.

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2800415]For all you know, Chloe Cole finds it more worthwhile now to be the poster child for conservatives against gender-affirming care that she is misrepresenting her position about the sex-change operation when she was about to undergo it.[/QUOTE]Here is an article with a link to the lawsuit, you pseudointellectual fool! It took me less than 60 seconds to find it: [URL]https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-03-02/transgender-patients-chloe-cole-lawsuit-against-kaiser-lgbtq-rights[/URL].

And the point of your post was what exactly?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2800542]Uh sorry, After Russiagate, Hunter Biden's laptop, and the fiascos with Covid, you dumb Dems do not get to say your sources are superior.

Here is an article with a link to the lawsuit, you pseudointellectual fool! It took me less than 60 seconds to find it: [URL]https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-03-02/transgender-patients-chloe-cole-lawsuit-against-kaiser-lgbtq-rights[/URL].

And the point of your post was what exactly?[/QUOTE]Evidently you believe that [B]one person's[/B] dissatisfaction with the process means [B]all transgenders[/B] feel the same way.

However, directly from the source you provided is this: "In fact, studies indicate that only 1% to 2% of transgender individuals "detransition," and that often happens because of discrimination and other social pressures, not because the patients genuinely feel they have made a mistake about their gender identity. ".

Weren't you one of the people who said of COVID that since it only has a mortality rate of 1% to 2%, it really isn't that big of a deal. Well, your own source says that only 1% to 2% of transgenders "detransition" so this too ought to be no big deal, right?

Unless, of course, you want to argue that being alive (after detransitioning) is worse than being dead (from COVID).

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2800542]Uh sorry, After Russiagate, Hunter Biden's laptop, and the fiascos with Covid, you dumb Dems do not get to say your sources are superior.[/QUOTE]Uh, sorry but all three references here are meaty lunatic cow pies.

Good thing Elvis ignores my posts, I wouldn't want to upset him.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2798078]” My own opinion is that a woman is a person that believes they are a woman.”
Believes they are a what? That is a circular definition.[/QUOTE]In what way is it circular? It's simply a form of self-certification. Let me give you an example to demonstrate how legitimate my position is. Let's say I am dive leader on a cruise boat. Passenger comes onboard and wants to do w his dive computer and dive gear and wants to do the first dive, which is a deep water wreck dive. Who is the best position to assess if the diver can make this dive? Of course, the passenger himself. He is going to sign a liability release to say he has the right skills, and off he goes. Maybe never to come back. Hehe. Would that be circular too?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2798078]
The fact that a man thinks he is a woman or vice versa defines him or her as insane. This insanity was called gender dysphoria and was recognised till a few years ago.
[/QUOTE]No, only a psychiatrist classifies someone as insane. I might think your insane based on your comments, but that's just a subjective opinion, and not grounded in scientific license. Gays were also once classed as insane, people who didn't belive in the bearded one in the sky too. Thank goodness for progress.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2798133]No, a definition is definitive. A woman is an adult female. Period. And a rose by any other name is still a rose.

Belief should have nothing to do with definitions, and the notion an adult female and adult male who thinks they are a woman are the same is insane. Trans men need a name, and they can pick whatever name they want to call themselves, but woman is off limits.

The problem with when you go fooling around with existing definitions of words is tyranny is so easily accomplished. When words and definitions are subjected to opinion, the value of law is quickly eroded, and tyranny is all but ensured.[/QUOTE]A linguistic prescriptivist! I had no idea you were French, Elvis.

"A woman is an adult female. ".
Well, that's one definition of the word, from a biological perspecive. BUt we both know words have multiple definitions. Look up "Male-Female Studded Rod end Joint" for a good example.

"adult male who thinks they are a woman are the same is insane".
Its far from insane if one's definition includes such people.

"Trans men need a name, and they can pick whatever name they want to call themselves, but woman is off limits. ".
Trans men call thmselves men, not women. So yes, I can see how you example would cause confusion.

"The problem with when you go fooling around with existing definitions of words is tyranny is so easily accomplished".
Its hard to keep up at times, I know. I remember when 'woke' simply meant being ethically aware of injustices, but I now learn it means a whole long list things that I never knew I was guity of.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2800130]Yeah, look at this nonsense called the Great Virality project.
[/QUOTE]Great post.

The one thing the authoritarian propagandists have got going for them is that the main stream media wer compliant in these lies and cover ups, so will continue to bury it as best they can. They are bought out just as much as the government is. Its just one big corruption mill.

Comeuppance time is finally here! And we're just getting started. [B]Bust his balls[/B]! His former attorney went to jail for the same stuff. And what goes around comes around. Next!

[URL]https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/politics/live-news/trump-indictment-hush-money-stormy-daniels/index.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2800542]Uh sorry, After Russiagate, Hunter Biden's laptop, and the fiascos with Covid, you dumb Dems do not get to say your sources are superior.

Here is an article with a link to the lawsuit, you pseudointellectual fool! It took me less than 60 seconds to find it: [URL]https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-03-02/transgender-patients-chloe-cole-lawsuit-against-kaiser-lgbtq-rights[/URL].

And the point of your post was what exactly?[/QUOTE]Did you actually read this article? It is mostly an opinion piece that it is kind of beside my point that no one has heard the doctor's side because they have been bound by patient privacy laws.

As for my assertion that citing The Daily Mail does not prove anything, I stand by it because the proof of its shoddy journalism is self-evident in the article because there is no attempt to present the other side's position. And citing the other alleged failings of the media does not excuse the The Daily Mail of shoddy journalism. The failing of one side does not excuse the failing of the other side, so stop with the what-aboutism.

Finally, just knock it off with the insults. It makes you sound like a petulant child and nobody respects that.

More evidence that COVID vaccines cause excess deaths. This is really for Tiny, who appears at least open to reading / watching new evidence:
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G1SWjL7gmQ[/URL]

Of course, this will get zero coverage by the corporat ecaptured mainstream media since they are sponsored by Big Pharma too.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2803243]More evidence that COVID vaccines cause excess deaths. This is really for Tiny, who appears at least open to reading / watching new evidence:
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G1SWjL7gmQ[/URL]

Of course, this will get zero coverage by the corporat ecaptured mainstream media since they are sponsored by Big Pharma too.[/QUOTE]A youtube video, talking about a study (that may or may not have taken place) that has not even been peer reviewed. Very nice touch with the false title of "Get the latest information from the CDC. ".

What kind of scientist would release a study that is not peer reviewed.?

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2803227]Did you actually read this article? It is mostly an opinion piece that it is kind of beside my point that no one has heard the doctor's side because they have been bound by patient privacy laws.[/QUOTE]No, I did not read it, but you are the second dumb Dem to miss the point. Only point of linking the article was to get a link to the lawsuit.

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2803227]As for my assertion that citing The Daily Mail does not prove anything, I stand by it because the proof of its shoddy journalism is self-evident in the article because there is no attempt to present the other side's position.[/QUOTE]Okay, so I look at the LA Times story, "It's part of a concerted right-wing attack on LGBTQ rights, in which the health of transgender youth is exploited as a pretext for bans on gender-affirming care. It resembles the right-wing attack on abortion rights. ".

For a Democratic douche like you, that is not one sided bias.

As for your claim that the Daily Mail did not present both sides, that was impossible to do.

"Kaiser, for the moment, can't discuss Cole's case without her express permission because of federal and state patient privacy laws. That might change when Kaiser files a formal response to the lawsuit, which could be weeks or months from now. ".

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2803227]
Finally, just knock it off with the insults. It makes you sound like a petulant child and nobody respects that.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2800415] For all you know, Chloe Cole finds it more worthwhile now to be the poster child for conservatives against gender-affirming care that she is misrepresenting her position about the sex-change operation when she was about to undergo it.[/QUOTE]When someone files a lawsuit because they were not happy with their sex change surgery, you have no right to say that she is misrepresenting her position on sex change surgeries. Duh.

And then you blasted the Daily Mail because they reported on this lawsuit and called it shoddy journalism. No, that is what is called news. The LA Times calling it a "right wing attack" like the attack on abortion rights is not news but Democratic douche opinion that you consider news.

I will make you a deal. Quit being a stupid fool and I will quit calling you one.

I would also ask that you quit being a closed minded Democratic douche but it is best to take one step at a time.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2800587]Well, your own source[/QUOTE]LOL. I repeat the only reason I linked this article was to get to the lawsuit.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2800587]"In fact, studies indicate that only 1% to 2% of transgender individuals "detransition," and that often happens because of discrimination and other social pressures, not because the patients genuinely feel they have made a mistake about their gender identity. ".[/QUOTE]You and the LA Times are not qualified to review the quality of studies. For example, this one has a 6% dissatisfaction rate but has a 37% response rate. [URL]https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28471328/[/URL].

Of course, there are no links to these studies with 1 and 2% dissatisfaction rates.

"Proponents of these bans assert that puberty blockers and hormones used in such care endanger the lives of adolescents. They say the youths may be going through a phase that they'll soon outgrow and the treatments are based on overly indulgent diagnoses of "gender dysphoria".

The truth is just the opposite. Gender dysphoria diagnosis is neither novel nor a fad, as some partisan critics assert. Instead, it's recognized by professionals as a serious medical condition. ".

No, the truth is no one knows and the first rule of medicine is do no harm.

This is the same kind of reckless "expert" driven bullshit as the Covid vaccines. They were claimed to be safe and effective and now two years later, we all know (well maybe not you Democratic douches) that they were anything but.

[QUOTE=Elusive;2803271]A youtube video, talking about a study (that may or may not have taken place) that has not even been peer reviewed. Very nice touch with the false title of "Get the latest information from the CDC. ".

What kind of scientist would release a study that is not peer reviewed.?[/QUOTE]Its a preprint. A widely recognised form of research disclosure. A preprint is a full draft research paper that is shared publicly before it has been peer reviewed. Preprints achieve many of the goals of journal publishing, but within a much shorter time frame. The biggest benefits are: credit, feedback, and visibility. [URL]https://www.aje.com/arc/benefits-of-preprints-for-researchers/[/URL] As John Campbell states, the likelihood of the paper being peer reviewed and published is low due to corporate capture.

The study may not have taken place? What evidence do you have of that? The url is in the video, look it up.

False title? What false title?

It must be truly scary to have so much cognitive dissonance that you just shoot out the first wildest accusations you can come up with.

[QUOTE=Elusive;2803271]
What kind of scientist would release a study that is not peer reviewed.?[/QUOTE]An ethical one.

Two things that will never be in peer reviewed journals regardless of the evidence:

1. Covid vaccines kill people.

2. Opioids are under prescribed.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2803385]

It must be truly scary to have so much cognitive dissonance that you just shoot out the first wildest accusations you can come up with.[/QUOTE]No doubt. The people screaming "go science go" with regards to the Covid vaccines are the ones least likely to have looked at the data. You have to be a Democratic douche to think the Covid vaccines are safe and effective now.

Rand Paul was on Fox and made the point people were smarter than many thought. Like 99% of seniors who vaxxed but rates for children were miniscule. This is the Democrats biggest nightmare: people thinking for themselves.

But the real kicker of a video was this. Sorry, TK, your video was more informative but this one was more fun. Only Russell Brand can make the end of the world and science seem funny.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paOGVy8TYHI[/URL]

[QUOTE=TheCane;2803134]Comeuppance time is finally here! And we're just getting started. [B]Bust his balls[/B]! His former attorney went to jail for the same stuff. And what goes around comes around. Next!

[URL]https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/politics/live-news/trump-indictment-hush-money-stormy-daniels/index.html[/URL][/QUOTE]Yep, that is the biggest and most damning American Politics Real News item of the day. But typically dumb Repub hillbilly wingers would rather post wildly off this forum's topic nonsense like all the imaginary deaths the Covid vaccine caused, how close they are to choosing a sex change operation for themselves if they read or hear just one more mention of it being their right to choose it and so on.

This first Trump indictment might in and of itself be less legally threatening than the idictments he has earned for worse crimes. However, this one is critical in that it was the gateway crime that allowed him and his Repub supporters and partners to inflict historic levels of economic disaster, death and destruction on America and most of the world.

Sure, Repub FBI Director Comey's contribution likely shifted enough votes to Trump at the last minute in 2016 to put him in the White House. Russia's extraordinarily high level of collusion with Camp Trump, the RePutinKlan Party and winger media like Fux News certainly shifted just enough votes to do it.

But there was nothing illegal about those pro Trump campaign moves. They were merely unethical and Anti-American.

However, this Trump campaign election rigging move to put him in the White House was illegal.

And without any one of those bits of election interference or this illegal one, Repub Icon and current 2024 RePutinKlan Party prez nominee frontrunner Trump could not have flushed Trillions in American taxpayer dollars down the shitter with nothing to show for it except a million fewer jobs created with their economic "stimulus" legislation than without it.

He couldn't have golfed through 3-4 non existant Infrastructure Weeks over the golf course of 4 miserable years.

He couldn't have done so much to weaken American democracy, alienate our pro democtratic allies and strengthen his Masters Putin, Xi, Kim and other authoritarian dictatorships around the world.

He couldn't have pulled the key Pandemic Prevention and Response agents out of China to make Xi feel better and against all expert advice not to do something so stupid and dangerous many months before the first coronavirus cases emerged in secrecy when only a couple of months' heads up about it to responsible parties would have easily averted Trump's Pandemic and all the problems that followed.

Therefore, 1,000,000+ Americans and many more people around the world would not have been mass murdered.

Worldwide economies would not have crashed and millions upon millions of jobs destroyed amid neccessary Trump's Pandemic mitigation closures.

We would never have suffered those monumental losses and the lingering Supply-Chain destruction-based Inflation.

America and the world would have definitely been better off in ways beyond words had Trump not illegally rigged the 2016 election in his favor with this Original Sin crime for which he has now been indicted.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2803290]No, I did not read it, but you are the second dumb Dem to miss the point. Only point of linking the article was to get a link to the lawsuit.

Okay, so I look at the LA Times story, "It's part of a concerted right-wing attack on LGBTQ rights, in which the health of transgender youth is exploited as a pretext for bans on gender-affirming care. It resembles the right-wing attack on abortion rights. ".

For a Democratic douche like you, that is not one sided bias.

As for your claim that the Daily Mail did not present both sides, that was impossible to do.

"Kaiser, for the moment, can't discuss Cole's case without her express permission because of federal and state patient privacy laws. That might change when Kaiser files a formal response to the lawsuit, which could be weeks or months from now. ".[/QUOTE]This quote is from the LA Times, not the Daily Mail. If the LA Times can write that the doctor issued a generic statement that "it provides patient-centered gender-affirming care that is consistent with the standards of medical care and excellence and. Founded on sound research and best medical practices," then so can the Daily Mail. The fact that it did not shows that its standard of journalism is questionable at best.

And if a number of your readers fail to understand your point, perhaps the problem lies not with the reader but your poor writing?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2803290]When someone files a lawsuit because they were not happy with their sex change surgery, you have no right to say that she is misrepresenting her position on sex change surgeries. Duh.

And then you blasted the Daily Mail because they reported on this lawsuit and called it shoddy journalism. No, that is what is called news. The LA Times calling it a "right wing attack" like the attack on abortion rights is not news but Democratic douche opinion that you consider news.

I will make you a deal. Quit being a stupid fool and I will quit calling you one.

I would also ask that you quit being a closed minded Democratic douche but it is best to take one step at a time.[/QUOTE]Please read my post carefully: I called the Daily Mail shoddy journalism because their article was one-sided and did not even tried to present the other side's position; nowhere did I write that it is shoddy because it reported on this lawsuit.

As for your claim that I am misrepresenting her position, I would like to point out that I did no such thing. I suggested that it is possible that she may have had a change of mind between the surgery and now; if she feels aggrieved now, she is perfectly entitled to. But to sue her doctors because she had a change of heart, that's problematic.

And, by the way, what would you call the conservative's action on this matter? You yourself used the words "attack on abortion rights" to describe to it; so does that mean that you agree with the LA Times' description?

Finally, why are you so angry? Are things in the real world not going your way and one way that you feel better is by blasting your vitriol here to make yourself feel better about yourself?

[QUOTE=JustTK;2803243]More evidence that COVID vaccines cause excess deaths. This is really for Tiny, who appears at least open to reading / watching new evidence:
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6G1SWjL7gmQ[/URL]

Of course, this will get zero coverage by the corporat ecaptured mainstream media since they are sponsored by Big Pharma too.[/QUOTE]Good one JustTK. I spent two or three hours looking at the paper in question and related info. And for a while was having second thoughts about getting my second bivalent COVID booster this month.

However, in the end, I believe the researchers came up with a spurious correlation, like Tooms' spurious correlations between Republican Presidents and recessions, lower GDP growth, higher unemployment, and a pandemic. Or mine between Democratic Presidents and the number of Americans who've died in wars that started when they were in office. There's no cause and effect.

Here's the paper in question:

[url]https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202302.0350/v1/download[/url]

The Norwegians performed a regression analysis between excess mortality (dependent variable), and vaccination uptake, month number, average 2020 to 2021 mortality relative to 2016 to 2019 mortality, and life expectancy (independent variables) and they came up with a correlation, which I believe is spurious, given their intent is to show the vaccines are killing lots of people. If they'd instead used deaths from heat waves and from COVID the disease, I suspect they would have come up with a better correlation. The heat deaths occurred mostly in France, Spain, Germany, and Portugal, countries with high vaccination uptake rates. There were virtually none in the low vaccination uptake rate countries, which are mostly in Eastern Europe.

I'm too lazy to look at COVID deaths by month and country quantitatively, in an Excel spreadsheet, but have looked at graphs of deaths versus time during 2022 for the highest and lowest vaccination uptake countries in the Norwegians' paper. And it looks to me like COVID deaths per capita were lower for whatever reason in the lower uptake countries in 2022, which were all in Eastern Europe. Furthermore, after the winter of 2021/2022, that is, after the worldwide Omicron wave, the death rates from COVID went down to really low levels in the lowest vaccination countries, while they did not in the highest vaccination countries. So, again, I'd attribute part of the Norwegian's findings to higher death rates from COVID in the low vaccination countries.

Despite what Fauci, the CDC, and other health authorities would tell you on one hand and what the anti-vaxxers would tell you on the other, both vaccines and past infection provide good immunity against severe disease. And also COVID did not move through Europe uniformly. You may recall that initially in 2020, Eastern Europe (low vaccination uptake countries) had low rates of COVID infection, but later caught up and in some instances surpassed western European countries in per capita COVID deaths. So anyway I don't think the fact that the Eastern European countries had lower per capita death rates from COVID, the disease, in 2022 is an argument for superiority of getting immunity through disease instead of vaccines. In fact, for people my age anyway, I think that's a stupid argument.

Now I'm weak in statistics. The only info I see in their paper that gives me an idea of whether their correlations are statistically significant is Figure 1 C on page 5, which shows their data fits (the straight lines) and actual data (yellow or orange line) for percentage excess deaths by month. They emphasize the fact that the % excess deaths is increasing 2022. The reason is that you expect that % excess deaths in January and February should be higher, because of the Omicron wave. But why are they higher still in July? Why, it must be the aftereffects of the vaccines! Again, I'd chalk that up to heatwave deaths. The excess deaths fall off a lot in subsequent months.

The excess death rates go down after July. Without the July data, the Norwegian's correlation looks a lot less impressive.

Finally, there's other research, which looks to be better quality to me, that contradicts the Norwegian's hypothesis. Here are a couple of links. The first is particularly good and more comprehensive than the Norwegian study -- see Figure 6 in particular.

[URL]https://healthfeedback.org/what-can-explain-the-excess-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-europe-in-2022/[/URL]

[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9319484/[/URL]

Now, you will see posts on social media showing a correlation between higher vaccination rates and higher mortality or hospitalization rates from COVID within single countries or counties or wherever. The UK and Israel probably account for the majority. They're bogus, as they fail to segment by age group. In parts of the UK, for example, a lot more old people got vaccinated than young people. And old people are mostly the ones who were hospitalized and died with COVID. Correct for age and it's obvious the vaccines prevented hospitalizations and death.

Also, if you look like a country like Taiwan, which was walled off from COVID through travel restrictions, you'll see higher all cause mortality in the vaccinated. Contrary to what Fauci, the CDC, the WHO and other health authorities would have you believe, thousands or tens of thousands of people have died from COVID vaccines. Millions however have died from COVID the disease. It's a numbers game. And for people my age, but perhaps not yours, the decision to get the vaccine was a no brainer.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2803873]Good one JustTK. I spent two or three hours looking at the paper in question and related info. And for a while was having second thoughts about getting my second bivalent COVID booster this month.

However, in the end, I believe the researchers came up with a spurious correlation, like Tooms' spurious correlations between Republican Presidents and recessions, lower GDP growth, higher unemployment, and a pandemic. Or mine between Democratic Presidents and the number of Americans who've died in wars that started when they were in office. There's no cause and effect.

Here's the paper in question:

[url]https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202302.0350/v1/download[/url]

The Norwegians performed a regression analysis between excess mortality (dependent variable), and vaccination uptake, month number, average 2020 to 2021 mortality relative to 2016 to 2019 mortality, and life expectancy (independent variables) and they came up with a correlation, which I believe is spurious, given their intent is to show the vaccines are killing lots of people. If they'd instead used deaths from heat waves and from COVID the disease, I suspect they would have come up with a better correlation. The heat deaths occurred mostly in France, Spain, Germany, and Portugal, countries with high vaccination uptake rates. There were virtually none in the low vaccination uptake rate countries, which are mostly in Eastern Europe.

I'm too lazy to look at COVID deaths by month and country quantitatively, in an Excel spreadsheet, but have looked at graphs of deaths versus time during 2022 for the highest and lowest vaccination uptake countries in the Norwegians' paper. And it looks to me like COVID deaths per capita were lower for whatever reason in the lower uptake countries in 2022, which were all in Eastern Europe. Furthermore, after the winter of 2021/2022, that is, after the worldwide Omicron wave, the death rates from COVID went down to really low levels in the lowest vaccination countries, while they did not in the highest vaccination countries. So, again, I'd attribute part of the Norwegian's findings to higher death rates from COVID in the low vaccination countries.

Despite what Fauci, the CDC, and other health authorities would tell you on one hand and what the anti-vaxxers would tell you on the other, both vaccines and past infection provide good immunity against severe disease. And also COVID did not move through Europe uniformly. You may recall that initially in 2020, Eastern Europe (low vaccination uptake countries) had low rates of COVID infection, but later caught up and in some instances surpassed western European countries in per capita COVID deaths. So anyway I don't think the fact that the Eastern European countries had lower per capita death rates from COVID, the disease, in 2022 is an argument for superiority of getting immunity through disease instead of vaccines. In fact, for people my age anyway, I think that's a stupid argument.

Now I'm weak in statistics. The only info I see in their paper that gives me an idea of whether their correlations are statistically significant is Figure 1 C on page 5, which shows their data fits (the straight lines) and actual data (yellow or orange line) for percentage excess deaths by month. They emphasize the fact that the % excess deaths is increasing 2022. The reason is that you expect that % excess deaths in January and February should be higher, because of the Omicron wave. But why are they higher still in July? Why, it must be the aftereffects of the vaccines! Again, I'd chalk that up to heatwave deaths. The excess deaths fall off a lot in subsequent months.

The excess death rates go down after July. Without the July data, the Norwegian's correlation looks a lot less impressive.

Finally, there's other research, which looks to be better quality to me, that contradicts the Norwegian's hypothesis. Here are a couple of links. The first is particularly good and more comprehensive than the Norwegian study -- see Figure 6 in particular.

[URL]https://healthfeedback.org/what-can-explain-the-excess-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-europe-in-2022/[/URL]

[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9319484/[/URL]

Now, you will see posts on social media showing a correlation between higher vaccination rates and higher mortality or hospitalization rates from COVID within single countries or counties or wherever. The UK and Israel probably account for the majority. They're bogus, as they fail to segment by age group. In parts of the UK, for example, a lot more old people got vaccinated than young people. And old people are mostly the ones who were hospitalized and died with COVID. Correct for age and it's obvious the vaccines prevented hospitalizations and death.

Also, if you look like a country like Taiwan, which was walled off from COVID through travel restrictions, you'll see higher all cause mortality in the vaccinated. Contrary to what Fauci, the CDC, the WHO and other health authorities would have you believe, thousands or tens of thousands of people have died from COVID vaccines. Millions however have died from COVID the disease. It's a numbers game. And for people my age, but perhaps not yours, the decision to get the vaccine was a no brainer.[/QUOTE]For everybody who is convinced that the COVID vaccines caused a massive amount of deaths, it will make no difference whatsoever regardless of the number of studies, papers, etc. That say otherwise.

These "everybody knows" folks are the same ones who believe cockamamie conspiracy theories like Chinese thermostats changed votes in the 2020 election or that Italian space lasers changed votes or that JFK (or is it JFK, Jr?) is really alive or that the Earth is flat or that the moon is made out of green cheese.

Mark Twain attributed quote this to Benjamin Disraeli. Something for think about those who love to quibble about ephemera. Ah, but who first said, "the devil's in the details " ?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2803873]Good one JustTK. I spent two or three hours looking at the paper in question and related info. And for a while was having second thoughts about getting my second bivalent COVID booster this month.

However, in the end, I believe the researchers came up with a spurious correlation, like Tooms' spurious correlations between Republican Presidents and recessions, lower GDP growth, higher unemployment, and a pandemic. Or mine between Democratic Presidents and the number of Americans who've died in wars that started when they were in office. There's no cause and effect.

Here's the paper in question:

[url]https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202302.0350/v1/download[/url]
[/QUOTE]Again, thanks for taking the time to look at the paper Tiny. I think if you watch John Campbell's accompanying / explanatory video to the paper, you would find answers to several of you concenrs. The university has no skin in the vax game. It is an independent body.

They did account for many possible confounding variables such as other causes like heat waves and COVID deaths. These were accounted for and the correlation still exists.

You have now seen evidence of excess deaths (that you orginally stated would motivate you to consider seriously that vax deaths were occuring in significant numbers), and evidence of higher deaths in highly vaxxed countries. You have also seen copious evidence that this evidence that is contrary to the state message is being suppressed. If you want to keep denying it, that's up to you. Note - these stats ignore vax injuries - these are said to be a huge number.

I think when the Rep Party gets in to power next time, we will see even more truth coming out. Rand Paul seems determined to get to the truth. That's great to see bcos although Trump was a huge liar, the Dem Party has become that party of lies and cover ups.

Excellent interview here by Kim Iversen with Jill Stein, including a discussion on the importance of 3rd parties.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5foGvzhA7Gc[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2804097]Again, thanks for taking the time to look at the paper Tiny. I think if you watch John Campbell's accompanying / explanatory video to the paper, you would find answers to several of you concenrs. The university has no skin in the vax game. It is an independent body.

They did account for many possible confounding variables such as other causes like heat waves and COVID deaths. These were accounted for and the correlation still exists.

You have now seen evidence of excess deaths (that you orginally stated would motivate you to consider seriously that vax deaths were occuring in significant numbers), and evidence of higher deaths in highly vaxxed countries. You have also seen copious evidence that this evidence that is contrary to the state message is being suppressed. If you want to keep denying it, that's up to you. Note - these stats ignore vax injuries - these are said to be a huge number.

I think when the Rep Party gets in to power next time, we will see even more truth coming out. Rand Paul seems determined to get to the truth. That's great to see bcos although Trump was a huge liar, the Dem Party has become that party of lies and cover ups.[/QUOTE]Hi JustTK, looking over the paper, I see they did kick out the heat wave deaths in their Model 5. And perhaps you could say they partly controlled for COVID deaths by including the average 2020 and 2021 mortality relative to 2016 to 2019 mortality as an independent variable. That is, perhaps higher death rates in 2020 and 2021 would be correlated with lower death rates in 2022. And, again, I don't have a good background in statistics. All I can do is look at figure 1 C and say from that the July data really pushed up the slope of their data fit. So anyway their case isn't convincing to me. A large part of it is that I just don't see how the vaccine could have worse long term effects than severe disease from COVID. And a person is less likely to have severe disease if he's vaccinated.

Also, except for Poland, the countries with low vaccination uptake rates are relatively small places. Most of the data, since it's weighted by population, is from countries that have small differences in vaccination rates. You can see this on Figure 1 D of the Norwegians paper. I'd guess the majority of the data is from countries with vaccination uptake rates of 72% to 75%.

I'd refer you again to Figure 6 in the following, which looks at many more countries, and shows "0" correlation between excess deaths and vaccination rates:

[url]https://healthfeedback.org/what-can-explain-the-excess-mortality-in-the-u-s-and-europe-in-2022/[/url]

I did listen to Campbell, and didn't get much more out of it than what I read in the paper. He does do a good job of emphasizing some of the points though.

We should revisit this in about six months or a year. It will be interesting to see if the Norwegians case holds up for time periods after September of 2022.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2803464]Yep, that is the biggest and most damning American Politics Real News item of the day. But typically dumb Repub hillbilly wingers would rather post wildly off this forum's topic nonsense like all the imaginary deaths the Covid vaccine caused, how close they are to choosing a sex change operation for themselves if they read or hear just one more mention of it being their right to choose it and so on.

This first Trump indictment might in and of itself be less legally threatening than the idictments he has earned for worse crimes. However, this one is critical in that it was the gateway crime that allowed him and his Repub supporters and partners to inflict historic levels of economic disaster, death and destruction on America and most of the world.

Sure, Repub FBI Director Comey's contribution likely shifted enough votes to Trump at the last minute in 2016 to put him in the White House. Russia's extraordinarily high level of collusion with Camp Trump, the RePutinKlan Party and winger media like Fux News certainly shifted just enough votes to do it.

But there was nothing illegal about those pro Trump campaign moves. They were merely unethical and Anti-American.

However, this Trump campaign election rigging move to put him in the White House was illegal.[/QUOTE]Here you go, here you go! And more indictments to come. Like I said, we're just getting started! He's going to be so tied up in legal problems that he can't even begin to think about being president again: [URL]https://www.aol.com/news/york-city-trumps-dreams-delivers-145741875.html[/URL]

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2803893]For everybody who is convinced that the COVID vaccines caused a massive amount of deaths, it will make no difference whatsoever regardless of the number of studies, papers, etc. That say otherwise.

These "everybody knows" folks are the same ones who believe cockamamie conspiracy theories like Chinese thermostats changed votes in the 2020 election or that Italian space lasers changed votes or that JFK (or is it JFK, Jr?) is really alive or that the Earth is flat or that the moon is made out of green cheese.[/QUOTE]Some people would indeed be alive today if they hadn't been afraid to get the vaccine. At this point, I don't know how much difference it makes. We've all gotten the disease and / or gotten vaccinated, so have some immunity from severe disease. Before long the death rate from COVID may be no worse than the flu. Perhaps we're just arguing about history. Let's hope so.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2803893]For everybody who is convinced that the COVID vaccines caused a massive amount of deaths, it will make no difference whatsoever regardless of the number of studies, papers, etc. That say otherwise.

These "everybody knows" folks are the same ones who believe cockamamie conspiracy theories like Chinese thermostats changed votes in the 2020 election or that Italian space lasers changed votes or that JFK (or is it JFK, Jr?) is really alive or that the Earth is flat or that the moon is made out of green cheese.[/QUOTE]LOL. Did you read what I wrote? Is everything with you I am smart and everyone else is stupid?

There is a big difference with regards to the vaccine for the 70+ crowd and other people especially teenage boys and young men. What gets me about you Democratic douches is the arrogance that there is a standard risk to benefit ratio for everyone and that the ration does not vary. You douches are like, "Nah, it is safe for everyone. " Vaccination should have been determined on a case by case basis versus a fucking mandate.

Nowhere was that more evident than on Joe Rogan's podcast. He has on doctors Malone and McCollough who warn about the dangers of the Covid vaccine, and I had to listen to you Democratic douches ramble on upon vaccine hesitancy and these two were anti-vaxxers when in fact BOTH doctors had been vaccinated.

The twitter files showed the government taking down anything, including factually accurate data, that promoted vaccine hesitancy. The government wanted people to be ignorant of the potential side effects on the vaccine.

If you douches were so right about everything, then why the call for Covid amnesty here, [URL]https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/?[/URL] You do not read what I am but every fucking day there is some admission from government that they lied or fucked up on Covid.

Ron Desantis called Deborah Birx when we were in the middle of lockdowns and asked for proof that lockdowns worked, and she said she had none, and Desantis said his jaw dropped. Florida had great success with Covid because Desantis only listened to a handful of people he trusted and were honest with him about things.

When Rand Paul asked Fauci if he was profiting off the vaccine, he told Senator Paul it was none of his business. Rand Paul also said the supposedly retired Fauci is still working for government (not sure why that is when he is 82 fucking years old) and the reason is Fauci is still working is that he is afraid he is going to get sued into the stone age unless he is in government and has immunity.

Once 2024 hits, these POS vaccines are either going to be taken off the market or the drug companies are going to come even cleaner with the side effects. My guess is the drug companies pull said vaccines off the market.

You get one person harmed and or killed by the vaccine to sue, get the real data, and put Fauci on the stand after all his contradictions, and you got a multibillion dollar lawsuit.

It is all arrogance with you douches. Anyone who voted for Trump is stupid. Anyone who did not believe in Russiagate is stupid, and anyone who did not get the vaccine is stupid too.

[QUOTE=TheCane;2804132]Here you go, here you go! And more indictments to come. Like I said, we're just getting started! He's going to be so tied up in legal problems that he can't even begin to think about being president again: [URL]https://www.aol.com/news/york-city-trumps-dreams-delivers-145741875.html[/URL][/QUOTE]You have both Elon Musk and Scott Adams saying if Trump is arrested, he wins in a landslide. [URL]https://www.foxnews.com/politics/twitters-elon-musk-predicts-trump-will-win-re-election-landslide-victory-if-arrested[/URL].

That the Dems went forward and arrested him on the stupidest charge in the history of mankind told me not that they want Trump out of the election but they want him as a preferred candidate.

To me, this says the Dems want Trump and are scared shitless of Desantis. If Desantis is the nominee, the age issue, the way Biden has mishandled the economy, the Ukraine war, and to me the biggie is how Biden completely screwed up with regards to Covid are the issues. If Trump is the nominee, we have to hear the Democratic douches try to outdo each other on the Trump name calling.

So the idea that this arrest knocks out Trump is reading it wrong. Everyone is saying it makes him a stronger not weaker candidate, and Desantis has lost ground because of it.

Hiliary pays for the bogus Steele dossier, which is 100 X more serious than this, and pays a fine, and Trump is arrested for paying off some hooker to not speak is a felony? LOL. We are actually used to this uneven justice system now.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2803293]LOL. I repeat the only reason I linked this article was to get to the lawsuit.

You and the LA Times are not qualified to review the quality of studies. For example, this one has a 6% dissatisfaction rate but has a 37% response rate. [URL]https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28471328/[/URL].

Of course, there are no links to these studies with 1 and 2% dissatisfaction rates.

"Proponents of these bans assert that puberty blockers and hormones used in such care endanger the lives of adolescents. They say the youths may be going through a phase that they'll soon outgrow and the treatments are based on overly indulgent diagnoses of "gender dysphoria".

The truth is just the opposite. Gender dysphoria diagnosis is neither novel nor a fad, as some partisan critics assert. Instead, it's recognized by professionals as a serious medical condition. ".

No, the truth is no one knows and the first rule of medicine is do no harm.

This is the same kind of reckless "expert" driven bullshit as the Covid vaccines. They were claimed to be safe and effective and now two years later, we all know (well maybe not you Democratic douches) that they were anything but.[/QUOTE]Adults can lop off whatever parts of their bodies they wish to fulfil their weird fetishes. However, children's brains are not developed enough to make such life-altering decisions, which is why it is criminal that healthy breasts and penises are being sliced off children as young as 13. When the country sorts itself out, possibly post-boogaloo, there will be many criminal prosecutions of the perpetrators of these child mutilations.

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2803608]Are the anti-sodomites on this thread concerned about a major threat to children? Why don't you just tell the truth, that you think homosexuality is icky?
[/QUOTE]Both things can be simultaneously true.

Along with the collapse over the past two years of American military prestige and economic power, this week has seen the end of our once-respected judiciary. Leftwing activist judges and Soros-funded politicized prosecutors have been a problem for some years, but two events this week have signalled that judicial impartiality is over.

The egregious persecution of the former president and current opposition leader by his political enemies is the primary indicator, particularly given the inherent weakness of the "case", the fact that no former president has ever been arrested before, and the fact that far more obvious criminality committed by the Bidens and Clintons has been ignored.

However, another case is perhaps almost as relevant. Douglass Mackey was just convicted by a leftist Washington jury and faces prison for sending memes.

Yes, for sending memes. For exercising his First Amendment rights.

In 2016, Mackey was a leading figure on Twitter (in the days when it still permitted free speech) under the name "Ricky Vaughn". His account became extremely influential for the many cutting and hilarious memes he posted, which contributed to the victory of Donald Trump. As such, Globohomo decided to persecute him in order to dissuade others from mocking it.

His "crime" was to have posted a satirical meme before the 2016 election encouraging democrat voters to vote by text. Of course, it is impossible to vote in this way, as anyone with room temperature IQ knows, and it was meant as a comedic insult directed at the intelligence of democrat voters.

What is particularly fascinating is that a left-wing democrat activist, Kristina Wong, posted exactly the same meme at the same time, directed toward Republican voters: telling them to vote by text or wait till "Super Wednesday" (the day after polls closed).

In an impartial, unbiased system, there would be no way of prosecuting Mackey without prosecuting Wong. They literally posted the same meme at the same time, directed toward opposing voters.

And yet Kristina Wong is out and about, happily doing a campus tour, while Mackey faces prison. This is because the American justice system is now part of the politicized swamp.

Just as leftist rioters are permitted to attack courthouses, burn cities and lately invade the Tennessee Capitol building without consequence, while rightwing protesters spend years in prison for walking through the Washington Capitol; so rightwingers are now arrested for political speech and satire that leftists get away with scot free.

Expect consequences.

[URL]https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/04/leftist-activist-kristina-wong-out-on-campus-comedy-tour-posted-the-same-joke-as-douglass-mackey-but-will-never-be-indicted-in-our-two-tier-justice-system/[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2804097]Again, thanks for taking the time to look at the paper Tiny. I think if you watch John Campbell's accompanying / explanatory video to the paper, you would find answers to several of you concenrs. The university has no skin in the vax game. It is an independent body.

They did account for many possible confounding variables such as other causes like heat waves and COVID deaths. These were accounted for and the correlation still exists.

You have now seen evidence of excess deaths (that you orginally stated would motivate you to consider seriously that vax deaths were occuring in significant numbers), and evidence of higher deaths in highly vaxxed countries. You have also seen copious evidence that this evidence that is contrary to the state message is being suppressed. If you want to keep denying it, that's up to you. Note - these stats ignore vax injuries - these are said to be a huge number.

I think when the Rep Party gets in to power next time, we will see even more truth coming out. Rand Paul seems determined to get to the truth. That's great to see bcos the Dem Party has become that party of lies and cover ups.[/QUOTE]Leftists can deny any reality. They can deny that a man is a man. They can deny that it is evil to slice off a 13 year old child's healthy genitals. They can deny that the border is wide open. They can claim that the world is going to end in, I think 8 years now, right AOC? Don't be surprised that they deny vax deaths too.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2803015]In what way is it circular?[/QUOTE]"What is a woman?" "Someone who says they are a woman". That is a circular argument. They have not defined the word "woman". FYI, the definition is: adult human female.

The diving story you blathered on about was just too stupid to bother with.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2803015]No, only a psychiatrist classifies someone as insane. Gays were also once classed as insane, people who didn't belive in the bearded one in the sky too. Thank goodness for progress [/QUOTE]You've rather amusingly just defeated your own argument. The fact that "accredited psychiatrists" once classified homosexuals and religious non-believers as insane shows that their profession is manipulated by the political controllers of society, like most things.

Nowadays, they are being manipulated by the woke Globohomo lobby which is in control of America. Any psychiatrist who dares to oppose the idea that cutting off your dick and calling yourself Shirley is anything other than a stunning and brave indicator of complete mental stability is destroyed and cast out like a heretic of old.

Woke globohomo is the new religion, and trannies are among its most sacred cows. Criticize, or worse, mock them at your peril, heathen!

[QUOTE=JustTK;2803021]
"A woman is an adult female. ".
Well, that's one definition of the word, from a biological perspecive. BUt we both know words have multiple definitions.[/QUOTE]No, they don't. A woman is an adult human female. Not a mentally ill male with gender dysphoria worsened and egged on by the media who decides to mutilate himself.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2803290]No, I did not read it, but you are the second dumb Dem to miss the point. Only point of linking the article was to get a link to the lawsuit.

Okay, so I look at the LA Times story, "It's part of a concerted right-wing attack on LGBTQ rights, in which the health of transgender youth is exploited as a pretext for bans on gender-affirming care. It resembles the right-wing attack on abortion rights. ".

For a Democratic douche like you, that is not one sided bias.

As for your claim that the Daily Mail did not present both sides, that was impossible to do.

"Kaiser, for the moment, can't discuss Cole's case without her express permission because of federal and state patient privacy laws. That might change when Kaiser files a formal response to the lawsuit, which could be weeks or months from now. ".



When someone files a lawsuit because they were not happy with their sex change surgery, you have no right to say that she is misrepresenting her position on sex change surgeries. Duh.

And then you blasted the Daily Mail because they reported on this lawsuit and called it shoddy journalism. No, that is what is called news. The LA Times calling it a "right wing attack" like the attack on abortion rights is not news but Democratic douche opinion that you consider news.

I will make you a deal. Quit being a stupid fool and I will quit calling you one.

I would also ask that you quit being a closed minded Democratic douche but it is best to take one step at a time.[/QUOTE]Yet again, the reality denial by the leftist dem douches is breathtaking.

Here we have a horrible, heartbreaking story told by a courageous 18 year old about how she was manipulated in her early teens, as an impressionable child whose brain was nowhere near fully developed, by the trans lobby to mutilate her genitals and sterilize herself.

Any person with a shred of decency would want those responsible for destroying her life to be severely punished. And yet here we have the usual leftist douches defending them.

I didn't use to be a religious person, but the events of the past few years have frankly made me expect and hope for God's wrath to come down on the Washington Globohomo ZOG swamp and its tentacles and toadies.

[QUOTE=ErsatzJulian;2803560]the doctor issued a generic statement that "it provides patient-centered gender-affirming care that is consistent with the standards of medical care and excellence and. Founded on sound research and best medical practices," [/QUOTE]Oh, thank goodness for that! I was kinda worried that chopping off the healthy genitals of confused 15 year old children might not be totally above board, but after reading that statement I can now join the leftist dem douches and support mass child mutilation.

Why stop at 13? I vaguely remember when I was 6 or 7 years old at my friend's house, we took some of his mom's heels out of her closet and walked round in them for shits and giggles. Clearly both of us should have had our penises sliced off there and then.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804232]Leftists can deny any reality. They can deny that a man is a man. They can deny that it is evil to slice off a 13 year old child's healthy genitals. They can deny that the border is wide open. They can claim that the world is going to end in, I think 8 years now, right AOC? Don't be surprised that they deny vax deaths too.[/QUOTE]Reality is complex and if you think that you can put things into neatly labeled boxes, then you haven't done properly understood what you are looking at.

A former GOP operative, Anton Lazzaro found guilty on all charges of sex trafficking underage girls.

[B]MINNEAPOLIS -- Anton Lazzaro, a former GOP operative, has been found guilty of sex trafficking underage girls. [/B]

[URL]https://www.justice.gov/usao-mn/pr/federal-jury-finds-anton-tony-lazzaro-guilty-all-counts-child-sex-trafficking-conspiracy[/URL]
[URL]https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/closing-arguments-end-in-trial-of-anton-lazzaro-accused-of-sex-trafficking-minors/[/URL]

This guilty piece of crap, GOP Anton Lazzaro, must be the grooming "party of pedophiles", MTG is talking about in her unhinged 60 Minute rant/piece. MTG, should stop throwing stones in glass houses.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2804210]You have both Elon Musk and Scott Adams saying if Trump is arrested, he wins in a landslide. [URL]https://www.foxnews.com/politics/twitters-elon-musk-predicts-trump-will-win-re-election-landslide-victory-if-arrested[/URL].

That the Dems went forward and arrested him on the stupidest charge in the history of mankind told me not that they want Trump out of the election but they want him as a preferred candidate.

To me, this says the Dems want Trump and are scared shitless of Desantis. If Desantis is the nominee, the age issue, the way Biden has mishandled the economy, the Ukraine war, and to me the biggie is how Biden completely screwed up with regards to Covid are the issues. If Trump is the nominee, we have to hear the Democratic douches try to outdo each other on the Trump name calling.

So the idea that this arrest knocks out Trump is reading it wrong. Everyone is saying it makes him a stronger not weaker candidate, and Desantis has lost ground because of it.

Hiliary pays for the bogus Steele dossier, which is 100 X more serious than this, and pays a fine, and Trump is arrested for paying off some hooker to not speak is a felony? LOL. We are actually used to this uneven justice system now.[/QUOTE]I see that the democrats are still showing their supreme stupidity. They are one of the reasons I left the USA.

Trump recently called on all of his 74,000,000 supporters to come out and protest his pending indictment.

As far as anyone could tell, one showed up.

No high profile politician called for this mass walk out by children and other young people to proest the mutilation of children's genitals, breasts, arms, legs and heads as the direct and hoped for result of Repub so-called president George W. Bush and his RePutinKlan Party's constant push to lift bans on whatever weapons will mutilate and kill the most children in the shortest amount of time and with the least amount of effort.

Which has indeed happened in the hundreds over the past few years. Not just one or two kinda sorta anecdotal examples of vague regret by an 18 year old.

Thousands showed up:

[B]See Photos From The National School Walkout Led By Students Protesting Gun Violence[/B]

[URL]https://time.com/national-school-walkout-gun-control-photos/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2804210]You have both Elon Musk and Scott Adams saying if Trump is arrested, he wins in a landslide. [URL]https://www.foxnews.com/politics/twitters-elon-musk-predicts-trump-will-win-re-election-landslide-victory-if-arrested[/URL].[/QUOTE]So now Elon Musk and Scott Adams are knowledgeable political pundits? LMAO! They need to stick to running business into the ground and destroying their careers. That's what they seem to do well. And I'll pick up the real political fallout from people who know what they're talking about. Donald Trump's fat ass will never sit in the Oval Office again. The ones who are truly scared of him are the GOPers. They won't stand up to his wrongdoings. But the rest of America will. Democrats and independents who know he's no good for the country and the rest of the world. So nominate his trifling ass if you want to. But he's a proven loser, and no way in hell does he win the presidency again, let alone by a landslide. GTFOH LOL!

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804232]Leftists can deny any reality. They can deny that it is evil to slice off a 13 year old child's healthy genitals. [/QUOTE]These are not leftists. These are lame lib Dem supporters. Nothing to do with the left, they are a stain on our reputation.

Chris, are you also against circumcision? Against tattoes, piercings? How about permanenet scarrinng caused by religious and political indoctrination?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804233]"What is a woman?" "Someone who says they are a woman". That is a circular argument. They have not defined the word "woman".
The diving story you blathered on about was just too stupid to bother with.
[/QUOTE]Let me give you abnother example you might be able to get onboard with -.

J. Hey Chris, how are you? What political party do you support?
C- I am a Republican.
J- Really? You don't look like one. You got a blue jumper on, you finished school, you had a shave. To me you look like a Dem. I understand that you say you don' care about immigrants, you don't beleive in high taxes to protect the poor and disadvantaged, but I don't beleive you. I think you are delluded by some mental dysfunction in your brain. Its obvious to me that really your are a Dem.
C- But J, I am a Rep! I am truly disgusted by gays and coloured folks and anyone else that is not just like me. I am a true Rep!
J. Sorry see, I am not going to accept what you say or what you think. I don't think it is good evidence. Insted I am going to run off what I see and interpret about you. Your a Dem!
C - Please J, just accept me for what I am. I really am self-serving and uncaring.

You can see the stand-off here? You can see how it would be best just to allow self-certification?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804233]You've rather amusingly just defeated your own argument. The fact that "accredited psychiatrists" once classified homosexuals and religious non-believers as insane shows that their profession is manipulated by the political controllers of society, like most things.
[/QUOTE]Yes, you got me there actually. BUt I am rather hopeful that the psychiactric discipline has improved its techniques since it burned witches at the stake. I am rather hopeful that objective tests exist that would demonstarted that gays, witches, theists and trans would all lie on the same 'pass' side of such a sanity examination. Assuming they are not insane as well as being one of those.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804237]OI vaguely remember when I was 6 or 7 years old at my friend's house, we took some of his mom's heels out of her closet and walked round in them for shits and giggles. Clearly both of us should have had our penises sliced off there and then.[/QUOTE]Well, you have to admit that would have saved you a lot of money in hooker fees.

You know what the real basis of this whole trans crap is though? It is a deflection on freedom. The Democratic douche powers that be want this issue so they can claim they are pro-freedom while destroying the first and fourth amendment. We no longer have freedom of speech but we do let people chop off their dicks and tits.

And this hooker payoff is at its core a charge of rigging an election. Hell, we just got through an election rigging with Hunter Biden's laptop. The whole Russian disinformation thing was the FBI rigging the election. You even have Democratic douches here saying "Eh, it is nothing. " when it showed a path that Joe Biden was getting paid off by the Chinese. If you are a Democratic douche, you think the laptop is insignificant. Hell, it is a hoax.

What I said after the 2016 election and this Russiagate bullshit to a dumb Dem is this: show me one person who voted for Trump because of Putin. Do you have even one?

Now show me one person who would have changed their vote if Trump's lawyer paid off a porn star on Trump's instructions or if he did it alone. "You know if Trump paid off that porn star, I am voting for the morally pure Hiliary, but if his lawyer did it, Trump has my vote. ".

On the flip side, Hunter Biden would have changed the election. In the laptop, he is fucking underage women, snorting cocaine, doing deals with China, and bitches to a family member, "How would you like it if you had to give half of what you earned to your father?" Show all that stuff and then the diary of Biden's daughter saying she was showering with her dad when young and that it was "probably inappropriate". Shit, the Addams family was less dysfunctional than this one. But to a Democratic douche, none of that matters. All that matters to the Democratic douches living overseas are the pension and SS checks still come rolling in.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804225]Adults can lop off whatever parts of their bodies they wish to fulfil their weird fetishes. However, children's brains are not developed enough to make such life-altering decisions, which is why it is criminal that healthy breasts and penises are being sliced off children as young as 13. When the country sorts itself out, possibly post-boogaloo, there will be many criminal prosecutions of the perpetrators of these child mutilations.[/QUOTE]You do realize that NO where in the US can children (under 18) can choose to get into any contract without parental consents. One can disagree with how the children are diagnosed, but doctors do not perform any surgery without consents. So if you like to send those parents to jail for this, ask your representative to write a law. If you want to punish the doctor for diagnosis, then again, ask your representative to write a law for that.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2804449]Well, you have to admit that would have saved you a lot of money in hooker fees.

You know what the real basis of this whole trans crap is though? It is a deflection on freedom. The Democratic douche powers that be want this issue so they can claim they are pro-freedom while destroying the first and fourth amendment. We no longer have freedom of speech but we do let people chop off their dicks and tits.

And this hooker payoff is at its core a charge of rigging an election. Hell, we just got through an election rigging with Hunter Biden's laptop. The whole Russian disinformation thing was the FBI rigging the election. You even have Democratic douches here saying "Eh, it is nothing. " when it showed a path that Joe Biden was getting paid off by the Chinese. If you are a Democratic douche, you think the laptop is insignificant. Hell, it is a hoax.

What I said after the 2016 election and this Russiagate bullshit to a dumb Dem is this: show me one person who voted for Trump because of Putin. Do you have even one?

Now show me one person who would have changed their vote if Trump's lawyer paid off a porn star on Trump's instructions or if he did it alone. "You know if Trump paid off that porn star, I am voting for the morally pure Hiliary, but if his lawyer did it, Trump has my vote. ".

On the flip side, Hunter Biden would have changed the election. In the laptop, he is fucking underage women, snorting cocaine, doing deals with China, and bitches to a family member, "How would you like it if you had to give half of what you earned to your father?" Show all that stuff and then the diary of Biden's daughter saying she was showering with her dad when young and that it was "probably inappropriate". Shit, the Addams family was less dysfunctional than this one. But to a Democratic douche, none of that matters. All that matters to the Democratic douches living overseas are the pension and SS checks still come rolling in.[/QUOTE]By law (thanks to O'bama), all former Presidents for the rest of their lives are provided with round-the-clock Secret Service protection. Let's see what our Democrats come up with to get around this one.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2804237]Oh, thank goodness for that! I was kinda worried that chopping off the healthy genitals of confused 15 year old children might not be totally above board, but after reading that statement I can now join the leftist dem douches and support mass child mutilation.

Why stop at 13? I vaguely remember when I was 6 or 7 years old at my friend's house, we took some of his mom's heels out of her closet and walked round in them for shits and giggles. Clearly both of us should have had our penises sliced off there and then.[/QUOTE]And stop twisting other people's word into a strawman argument so that you can knock it down.

That's just dishonesty and devalues yourself.

[QUOTE=Golfinho;2804567]By law (thanks to O'bama), all former Presidents for the rest of their lives are provided with round-the-clock Secret Service protection. Let's see what our Democrats come up with to get around this one.[/QUOTE]Always go to the source and read a little.

[URL]https://www.secretservice.gov/about/faq/general[/URL]

A Florida man was charged with 34 felony cournts in connection with falsifying business records.

The prosecution bears the burden of proving that the defendant is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

A jury of the defendent's peers will deliberate and yield a verdict once the all evidence is presented in court.

If the verdict is not guilty, the defendent is free to leave.

If the verdict is guilty, the defendent will go to the next phase, which is the sentencing.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2804845]A Florida man was charged with 34 felony cournts in connection with falsifying business records.

The prosecution bears the burden of proving that the defendant is guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

A jury of the defendent's peers will deliberate and yield a verdict once the all evidence is presented in court.

If the verdict is not guilty, the defendent is free to leave.

If the verdict is guilty, the defendent will go to the next phase, which is the sentencing.[/QUOTE]Yawn. Another Democratic douche saying this is about the law and not political. Ha ha!

[URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11922695/Alan-Dershowitz-says-Trump-trial-moved-STATEN-ISLAND.html[/URL]

Dershowitz said that Trump's hush money case, filed by the Manhattan the, was impossibly prejudiced owing to Manhattan being a Democrat stronghold.

Dershowitz said the trial should be held instead in Staten Island. The only one of New York City's five boroughs to regularly vote Republican.

And you know what the chances are this case is moved to Staten Island CM, slim and none, and slim just left town.

Oh yeah, this is all about the law. Did your nose grow as you typed that?

[QUOTE=Golfinho;2804567]By law (thanks to O'bama), all former Presidents for the rest of their lives are provided with round-the-clock Secret Service protection. Let's see what our Democrats come up with to get around this one.[/QUOTE]I am not sure what would be funnier: Trump winning and being in jail or seeing Trump in jail with a secret service contingent around him.

The Democratic douches do not get that with the 2020 election, the courts were saying to the pols, "We are not getting involved in elections. That is your shit, and we are not doing it."

The judge in this case is some Democratic douche who will let this case move on, and she will be showered with presents while Republicans call her every name in the book. But it will go to an Appeals Court or the NY Supreme Court and be tossed by them and for the same reason all the judges tossed Trump's 2020 cases, the judiciary wants and needs to stay the hell out of presidential and preferably all politics.

Even in 2000 when the US Supreme Court behaved as rationally as they could, they caught huge flak. The NY Times went down to Florida and counted the votes and even they came up with a Bush victory, but the Democratic douches, who fight any election they lose, were saying Bush did not win; Scotus gave him the victory.

To me, it is not even Democrat or Republican any more, it is pro or antiwar party presidents. Bernie Sanders is anti-war party and you can be damned sure he will never get a nomination. That is what this is really all about. A trump victory means no more trillion dollar blowjobs to the defense industry.

Great piece on the latest dangers posed to US hegemony by the likely expansion of BRICS, as a result of USA foriegn policy bullying.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnCudOKNzm0[/URL]

Huge Win!! Huge Progressive Wisconsin's Supreme Court Win!!

Liberal Judge (Janet Protasiewicz) wins Wisconsin’s Supreme Court election, and looks to save and restore women's pregnancy rights and equal voter rights, in a swing state that traditionally votes 50/50, but under the heavy handed and heavily gerrymandering of congressional maps by State Repubs, in recent times over the last several years, has been skewed more red than purple.

Wisconsinites reject Republican partisan extremism and affirm restore women's rights, voting rights, the will of the people, democracy and the democratic process.

[b]Liberals will win control of Wisconsin Supreme Court[/b]
[URL]https://www.ketr.org/2023-04-04/for-the-first-time-in-15-years-liberals-win-control-of-the-wisconsin-supreme-court[/URL]
[URL]https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/04/politics/wisconsin-election-supreme-court-results/index.html [/URL]


One less swing state, Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf, can't make another infamous "11th Hour" call, and ask for 11,700 votes....kkkk!

[QUOTE=Spidy;2804969]Huge Win!! Huge Progressive Wisconsin's Supreme Court Win!!

Liberal Judge (Janet Protasiewicz) wins Wisconsins Supreme Court election, and looks to save and restore women's pregnancy rights and equal voter rights, in a swing state that traditionally votes 50/50, but under the heavy handed and heavily gerrymandering of congressional maps by State Repubs, in recent times over the last several years, has been skewed more red than purple.

Wisconsinites reject Republican partisan extremism and affirm restore women's rights, voting rights, the will of the people, democracy and the democratic process.

[b]Liberals will win control of Wisconsin Supreme Court[/b]
[URL]https://www.ketr.org/2023-04-04/for-the-first-time-in-15-years-liberals-win-control-of-the-wisconsin-supreme-court[/URL]
[URL]https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/04/politics/wisconsin-election-supreme-court-results/index.html [/URL]


One less swing state, Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf, can't make another infamous "11th Hour" call, and ask for 11,700 votes....kkkk![/QUOTE]Yes, we can file this in a years' long series of historic wins for the Dems under the [B] "Dems Keep Losing" [/B]heading promoted by outright Repubs and stealth Bothsider / Neithersider Repubs.

You'll find it next to the [B]"Repub Stewardship Producing Every Great Recession And Massive Jobs Destruction of the Past 100 Years and None of the Historic Expansions and Jobs Creation is Merely a Wild, Inexplicable Coincidence"[/B] file and right there after the [B]"No USA-involved Wars Were Started Under Repubs, only Dems, Oh Except For The Civil War, the Vietnam War, The War in Kuwait, The War in Afghanistan, The War in Iraq, etc" [/B]file.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2804913]Great piece on the latest dangers posed to US hegemony by the likely expansion of BRICS, as a result of USA foriegn policy bullying.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnCudOKNzm0[/URL][/QUOTE]BRIC was termed made by some Goldman Sachs banker artificially linking large third world economies. It was named in 2001, and I first heard of it in 2004.

When I was in Brazil in 2004, it was 2. 5 reals to the dollar. Now it is 5 to the dollar.

The Russian Ruble has gone from 20 rubles to the dollar to 80 in the last 20 years.

The Indian Rupee has gone from around 45 rupees to the dollar to now 80 in the last 20 years.

The star of the show is the Chinese yuan. It has gone from 8 yuan to the dollar to about 7 now. As to why the yuan will never be the world's reserve currency, there is this, [URL]https://foreignpolicynews.org/2022/03/28/the-chinese-yuan-will-never-replace-the-us-dollar-as-the-worlds-reserve-currency/[/URL].

Geopolitician Peter Zeihan compares and contrasts the idea of money between the United States and China. In the United States, money is regarded as an economic good. In China, money is regarded as a political good. In the United States, money has value in and of itself. In China, money is a political good, and only has value if it can be used to achieve a political goal. The concepts of rate of return or profit margins do not exist in China, and therein lies the danger; eventually the law of supply and demand will win out, and the Chinese economy will have to face a correction. The longer it takes to face this economic correction, the greater damage that the inevitable correction will cause to the Chinese economy.

While the United States has an open economy, and money can be moved into and out of the United States at will, The Chinese government imposes capital control over moving money out of China.

By restricting the flow of capital in and out of China, investors risk losing all of their wealth should a political crisis develop that leads to an economic crisis or spiral into armed conflict.

In addition, the Chinese banking system is a complete disaster. If real estate in China were marked to market, they would all be insolvent.

If there were a currency that could compete with the dollar, it would not be a BRIC currency but the Euro. The Euro has the German influence all over it and the Germans are determined to have a hard currency but even with that, the banking sector in Europe is in horrible shape and that threatens the value of the Euro. Believe it or not, the banks in the USA are on much more solid ground than those in China and Europe.

And TK, you were in Venezuela. That is a nation that talked constant shit about the USA, was determined to get off the dollar. They inflated the crap out of the Bolivar to the point no one wanted it, then they tried floating a cryptocurrency no one wanted, and now they have given up and gone back to taking the dollar.

I have been listening to the dollar's demise going on for decades now, and anyone dumb enough to have invested in that idea has gotten killed. The dollar will be the world's reserve currency for the next 100 years.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2804838]Always go to the source and read a little.

[URL]https://www.secretservice.gov/about/faq/general[/URL][/QUOTE]Here you go, from the source.

"How long do former presidents receive Secret Service protection after they leave office?

In 1965, Congress authorized the Secret Service (Public Law 89-186) to protect a former president and his / her spouse during their lifetime, unless they decline protection. ".

[QUOTE=JustTK;2804913]Great piece on the latest dangers posed to US hegemony by the likely expansion of BRICS, as a result of USA foriegn policy bullying.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnCudOKNzm0[/URL][/QUOTE]Like we'll be seeing Yuan quotes at your local cambio everywhere? With the smallest spread on the board?

Otherwise, what's to think about? Unless you are like twenty-years' old and if you are and you're here at that age, then you've got other, bigger problems going on than exchange rates.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2805079]BRIC was termed made by some Goldman Sachs banker artificially linking large third world economies. It was named in 2001, and I first heard of it in 2004.

I have been listening to the dollar's demise going on for decades now, and anyone dumb enough to have invested in that idea has gotten killed. The dollar will be the world's reserve currency for the next 100 years.[/QUOTE]There is nothing artificial about BRICS. It is an official organisation. They have a forum planned for August 2023 in Durban. SA have invited Putin and already have refused the notion of having him arrested. There are plenty of countries now wanting to join BRICS, no doubt the majority of the ex or current victims of USA intimidation and crimes. Iran, Argentina and Algeria have applied to join BRICS. Indonesia, Egypt, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia could become part of the association. It already represents 40% of the world's population. The expanded BRICS would easily take it past 50%.

It doesn't have to replace the USD, simply offer an alternative for abused countries.

[QUOTE=Golfinho;2805109]Like we'll be seeing Yuan quotes at your local cambio everywhere? With the smallest spread on the board?

Otherwise, what's to think about? Unless you are like twenty-years' old and if you are and you're here at that age, then you've got other, bigger problems going on than exchange rates.[/QUOTE]Sorry, I have no idea what you mean.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2804873]Yawn. Another Democratic douche saying this is about the law and not political. Ha ha!

[URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11922695/Alan-Dershowitz-says-Trump-trial-moved-STATEN-ISLAND.html[/URL]

Dershowitz said that Trump's hush money case, filed by the Manhattan the, was impossibly prejudiced owing to Manhattan being a Democrat stronghold.

Dershowitz said the trial should be held instead in Staten Island. The only one of New York City's five boroughs to regularly vote Republican.

And you know what the chances are this case is moved to Staten Island CM, slim and none, and slim just left town.

Oh yeah, this is all about the law. Did your nose grow as you typed that?[/QUOTE]Does New York State law state that a misdemeanor to cover up another misdemeanor can be tried as a felony? Yes.

Did Donnie the Dumbass "cook the books" and mis-report the hush money payment to Stormy as something else? Yes, and it needs to be proven in court.

Was the above mis-reporting of the payment designed to assist Donnie the Dumbass in winning the 2016 election? Yes, and it needs to be proven in court.

Did a New York grand jury decide to indict (or is it indicate?) Donnie the Dumbass? Yes.

Will Donnie the Dumbass get his "day in court"? Yes.

Does every Repub in the USA believe that any trial of Donnie the Dumbass is political. Duh, yes.

Does every Repub in the USA believe that Donnie the Dumbass is above the law. Duh, yes.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2805061]You'll find it next to the "Repub Stewardship Producing Every Great Recession And Massive Jobs Destruction of the Past 100 Years and None of the Historic Expansions and Jobs Creation is Merely a Wild, Inexplicable Coincidence" file and right there after the "No USA-involved Wars Were Started Under Repubs, only Dems, Oh Except For The Civil War, the Vietnam War, The War in Kuwait, The War in Afghanistan, The War in Iraq, etc" file.[/QUOTE]Much of this isn't true, and has been comprehensively demonstrated as untrue many times here on this thread, especially with evidence of significant economic expansion and success during the 1950's under Ike, and in the unassailable fact that knee jerk Southern Democrats caused the Civil War with their fear and insistence on preserving the institution of slavery. They also began the hostilities. But it's actually hilarious when we have a bored, California leftist camped out in Southeast Asia on here daily so hell bent on preserving a Repub / Dem fake dichotomy that he reaches back to the Civil War to blame the liberal party of the day. Lolol Reminds me of the conservatives that want to blame modern Dems for the KKK, same gross error as over time the roles of the parties have reversed.

But anyway I've already posted my links and evidence a dozen times and am not doing it again, but this is the fallacy Tooms has going, twist or ignore all rebuttals and keep repeating the same errant talking points over and over. My retirement is just around the corner and I sure hope I find better things to do on a daily basis than that. Wink.

[URL]https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_nauseam[/URL]

He has these going as well, the old false dichotomy and black and white thinking error.

[URL]https://www.studysmarter.us/explanations/english/rhetoric/false-dichotomy/[/URL]

[URL]https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white[/URL]

Why did the southern Democrats secede from the Union? "State rights, correct?" State rights to do WHAT? Own slaves. They tell you with their own words, in the minutes of state legislatures concerned with secession and in precise comments from the leaders of the Confederacy. Yea the southern Democrats not only fired the first shot but in all other respects caused the Civil War. Slavery was the very motivation of their actions. No amount of "Democrat good / Republican Bad" posturing day after day even back to 1860 in a hooker forum is going to change that (eyeroll).

[URL]https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/secession-the-confederate-flag-and-slavery[/URL]

Would be nice if it were never necessary, or if we didn't need armed police departments or personal self defense, but that's not the real world. And since when did Republicans "start" the "War in Kuwait?" Lolol This was a multi-national, UN sanctioned response to Iraq's invasion. Iraq was repeatedly warned to get out but refused. Today Kuwait is an important partner in the region, and our relations with them are good and cooperative.

[URL]https://mei.edu/publications/beyond-post-desert-storm-how-elevate-us-kuwait-security-partnership[/URL]

It's also worth asking what the future would have looked like had Lincoln not acted to preserve the Union. We likely would not be the great nation we are today. How would the world wars have turned out? Though a "Republican Lolol" (whatever that meant in 1861) Lincoln's place among America's greatest heros is deserved.

But anyway I got enough going here to keep Tooms scrambling and typing away for the best part of a morning or afternoon, and that's the objective. There's plenty enough hyper-partisan websites and far left anti-war hogwash online for him to come up with something to ramble on about.

[QUOTE=Paulie97;2805827]Would be nice if it were never necessary, or if we didn't need armed police departments or personal self defense, but that's not the real world. And since when did Republicans "start" the "War in Kuwait?" Lolol This was a multi-national, UN sanctioned response to Iraq's invasion. Iraq was repeatedly warned to get out but refused. Today Kuwait is an important partner in the region, and our relations with them are good and cooperative.

[URL]https://mei.edu/publications/beyond-post-desert-storm-how-elevate-us-kuwait-security-partnership[/URL]

It's also worth asking what the future would have looked like had Lincoln not acted to preserve the Union. We likely would not be the great nation we are today. How would the world wars have turned out? Though a "Republican Lolol" (whatever that meant in 1861) Lincoln's place among America's greatest heros is deserved..[/QUOTE]My "files" examples were reactions to recent Repub Winger posts.

One Repub Winger, Tiny, recently posted this:

[QUOTE]However, in the end, I believe the researchers came up with a spurious correlation, like Tooms' spurious correlations between Republican Presidents and recessions, lower GDP growth, higher unemployment, and a pandemic. Or mine between Democratic Presidents and the number of Americans who've died in wars that started when they were in office. There's no cause and effect.[/QUOTE]I notice you, already a highly suspect advertant or inadvertent pro Repub Winger Bothsider / Neithersider, offered no objections to another Repub Winger alluding to dead Americans in wars REGARDLESS whether or not the Dem in the WH had anything whatsoever to do with "starting" it. No problem with you in him doing that, right?

And you will now please notice something you presumably failed to notice or refused to notice in my "files" examples to which you devoted not one but two outraged objections replies; I did not say anything about wars "started" by the POTUS at the time.

Another Repub Winger, Elvis, even more recently posted this:

[QUOTE]To me, it is not even Democrat or Republican any more, it is pro or antiwar party presidents. Bernie Sanders is anti-war party and you can be damned sure he will never get a nomination. That is what this is really all about. A trump victory means no more trillion dollar blowjobs to the defense industry.[/QUOTE]The clear inference being Dems are "pro war" while Trump's Repub Party is "antiwar". Lololol.

Please note that TWO recent presidents ordered boots-on-the-ground combat by USA military in the THREE most recent wars in which the USA military fought; Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Neither of them were Dems.

Biden has not ordered such a thing.

Obama did not order such a thing.

Clinton did not order such a thing.

Carter did not order such a thing.

Again, not one word of objection from you about that mischaracterization of which Party is pro war and which Party is antiwar. Interesting, isn't it?

Next.

Now, the only thing I recall you providing that suggested those Happy Days under Ike were good for the working man was some opinion piece where the dude who wrote it said so without any linked data to substantiate that opinion.

By stark contrast, I provided links showing the USA suffered through three, not one, not two, but three Recessions during Ike's 8 years in office, that his economy produced one of the worst jobs creating records in the past century and that the working man in America was so opposed to him and his Party that every major labor union in the country endorsed his right hand man's Dem opponent in 1960.

You got anything to refute the actual data, the verifiable record of results and the historical facts about that yet? Or do you only have your recommendation to watch a couple of episodes of Happy Days to see how much fun it looked like Ritchie and The Fonz were having at the time?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2806012]My "files" examples were reactions to recent Repub Winger posts.

One Repub Winger, Tiny, recently posted this:

Another Repub Winger, Elvis, even more recently posted this:[/QUOTE]How do you take a post where I am complimenting Bernie freaking Sanders on being anti-war and call that a right winger post?

Oh right, I forgot who I was talking about. There is no such thing as an antiwar and prowar party. Everything HAS to be split into Republicans and Democrats.

And all the prowar Dems (Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ) do not count. Only the Bushes count. Sigh. Bagdad Bob strikes again.

Republicans bad, Dems good, and the facts do not matter. Hell, that should be your tag line Tooms.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2805141]It doesn't have to replace the USD, simply offer an alternative for abused countries.[/QUOTE]TK, I just showed you that you have no data to back that up.

Take your worker in Colombia versus El Salvador where the dollar is used versus a native currency. You take a worker who saves a $1000 a year in Colombia versus El Salvador. Twenty years later, the guy in El Salvador has double what the guy in Colombia does because the Colombian Peso has gone to shit without even taking into account interest. Toss that in and the guy in El Salvador is on the order of 3 to 4 X richer than the guy in Colombia.

So are you for people being poorer? And then there is this bullshit about USA oppression? The truth is the USA has done a better job of managing its currency than Colombia has and almost all other parts of the world. Only Europe and the Euro can come close.

And BRICS? China is the largest economy in BRICS, and their currency is propped up and pegged to the dollar, and you do not see much of it being exchanged in the currency markets because China does not let out that much of it out. If China let the yuan float, it would be devalued in no time.

Everything with you is the USA abuses other nations when the truth is so many countries print up money to solve their problems thus devaluing their currency. All third world countries are good; it is just the USA is evil.

The USA has never defaulted on its debt. Argentina and Venezuela have gone bankrupt like a combined 20 times, and they have not had any crippling wars like Europe or even Asia has had. Your blaming the USA lets those nations and their shitty monetary policies off the hook.

There are plenty of instances of American policy fucking countries up. Maybe you can name a few where the USA is actually guilty of doing something wrong versus just blaming us for everything.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2806331]How do you take a post where I am complimenting Bernie freaking Sanders on being anti-war and call that a right winger post?

Oh right, I forgot who I was talking about. There is no such thing as an antiwar and prowar party. Everything HAS to be split into Republicans and Democrats.

And all the prowar Dems (Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ) do not count. Only the Bushes count. Sigh. Bagdad Bob strikes again.

Republicans bad, Dems good, and the facts do not matter. Hell, that should be your tag line Tooms.[/QUOTE]Bernie Sanders is not a Dem. A pro Repub pretend Bothsider vote for a useless in reality Third Party Socialist candidate Bernie Sanders in a national election might as well be an outright vote for the America-hating Repub candidate. But you already know that.

Your post suggested Trump's Repub Party is antwar. They initiated boots-on-the-ground USA combat maneuvers in all of the past three wars in which the USA fought over the past 35 years. Dems? Zero.

LOL. You even praised Repub Trump for not giving the defense industry a Trillion Dollar blowjob but he sure gave a good imitation of giving it a whopping $750 Billion blowjob. What was that worth in blowjob terms? One less stroke at the finish?

BTW, I'm sure Paulie will jump in any minute now to slam you for all those "falsehoods" and point out that Wilson did not "start" WW1, the same with FDR re WW2, Truman re the Korean War and, of course, LBJ re the Vietnam War, where Ike had already replaced French military boots-on-the-ground with USA boots-on-the-ground by 1954, about a year before the Vietnam War officially began by many historian's assessment.

Out of the 623,715 USA military fatalities during the 20th and 21st centuries, 602,450 occurred under Democrat Presidents:

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/1009819/total-us-military-fatalities-in-american-wars-1775-present/[/URL]

Most of the 21,267 deaths under Republicans occurred in Vietnam, when President Nixon was extracting us from that conflict, which LBJ started.

So Democrat Presidents are responsible for over 95% of the deaths of our young men and women.

Democrats are a bloodthirsty lot. A Democratic Party president will start a war at the drop of a hat to boost his approval rating. Democrats know the best way to win an election or pull the country out of a recession is to start a war.

And this post, like all my others on this topic, is satirical. Like I said, there's no cause and effect. For some reason Tooms feels compelled to argue against what I'm labeling as a spurious correlation. I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans.

[QUOTE=Paulie97;2805621]Why did the southern Democrats secede from the Union? "State rights, correct?" State rights to do WHAT? Own slaves. They tell you with their own words, in the minutes of state legislatures concerned with secession and in precise comments from the leaders of the Confederacy. Yea the southern Democrats not only fired the first shot but in all other respects caused the Civil War. Slavery was the very motivation of their actions. No amount of "Democrat good / Republican Bad" posturing day after day even back to 1860 in a hooker forum is going to change that (eyeroll).

[URL]https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/secession-the-confederate-flag-and-slavery[/URL][/QUOTE]Yes, it is curious that Tooms is compelled to label the Civil War as a Republican War. Presumably if he maintains that the present day Republican Party should accept responsibility for the Civil War, then he believes present day Democrats should accept responsibility for slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and repression afterwards.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2806538]BTW, I'm sure Paulie will jump in any minute now to slam you for all those "falsehoods" and point out that Wilson did not "start" WW1, the same with FDR re WW2, Truman re the Korean War and, of course, LBJ re the Vietnam War, where Ike had already replaced French military boots-on-the-ground with USA boots-on-the-ground by 1954, about a year before the Vietnam War officially began by many historian's assessment.[/QUOTE]Agreed except for the Vietnam War. Only two Congressmen voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, so it's not fair to pin the War entirely on LBJ. However you mischaracterize Eisenhower's role. Only nine out of 58,220 American casualties in Vietnam occurred during the Eisenhower administration.

[URL]https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics[/URL]

Now that I've cleared that up, it would be nice if you'd admit that Republican Presidents weren't responsible for recessions in 1981, 1990, and 2008, and the 2020 pandemic.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2806331]How do you take a post where I am complimenting Bernie freaking Sanders on being anti-war and call that a right winger post?
[/QUOTE]Indeed.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2806538]Bernie Sanders is not a Dem. A pro Repub pretend Bothsider vote for a useless in reality Third Party Socialist candidate Bernie Sanders in a national election might as well be an outright vote for the America-hating Repub candidate. [/QUOTE]So say Bernie Sanders, the #2 vote getter in the Democratic primaries in 2016 and 2020, had been running against Trump in the general election, instead of Clinton and Biden respectively. Would a vote for Sanders effectively be an outright vote for Trump?

That said, you are wise to view Sanders with suspicion. Like Elvis, I like Sanders' anti-war stance. But if he had become president I would have high tailed it out of the country. I might have ended up one of your neighbors in the Land of Smiles!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2806702]Out of the 623,715 USA military fatalities during the 20th and 21st centuries, 602,450 occurred under Democrat Presidents:

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/1009819/total-us-military-fatalities-in-american-wars-1775-present/[/URL]

Most of the 21,267 deaths under Republicans occurred in Vietnam, when President Nixon was extracting us from that conflict, which LBJ started.

So Democrat Presidents are responsible for over 95% of the deaths of our young men and women.

Democrats are a bloodthirsty lot. A Democratic president will start a war at the drop of a hat to boost his approval rating and pump money into the economy.

And this post, like all my others on this topic, is satirical. Like I said, there's no cause and effect. For some reason Tooms feels compelled to argue against what I'm labeling as a spurious correlation. I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans.

Yes, it is curious that Tooms is compelled to label the Civil War as a Republican War. Presumably if he maintains that the present day Republican Party should accept responsibility for the Civil War, then he believes present day Democrats should accept responsibility for slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and repression afterwards.

Agreed except for the Vietnam War. Only two Congressmen voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, so it's not fair to pin the War entirely on LBJ. However you mischaracterize Eisenhower's role. Only nine out of 58,220 American casualties in Vietnam occurred during the Eisenhower administration.

[URL]https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics[/URL]

Now that I've fessed up, it would be nice if you'd admit that Republican Presidents weren't responsible for recessions in 1981, 1990, and 2008, and the 2020 pandemic.[/QUOTE]Yours is one of the most disingenuous, intellectually dishonest posts that I have read in a long, long time. Let's have a look at the 10 deadliest wars in American history:

[URL]https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americas-10-deadliest-wars-2014-05-23[/URL]

1. American Civil War = Republican President: and to say that it doesn't count because it was a different Republican party from a long time ago is a bunch of malarky!

2. World War 2 = Democratic President: America was sucker punched by Japan and Hitler was running amuck around Europe and North Africa. If ever there was a war worth fighting this one was it!

3. World War 1 = Democratic President: we should have dealt with the Hun more appropriately then (was too punitive a peace towards Germany), and had we, then we could have headed off the rise of the Nazis.

4. Vietnam War = Republican President: to be fair this tragic war spanned a number of administrations, but it was a Republican who got us into it (Eisenhower) and a Republican who oversaw our shameful withdrawal in defeat from it (Nixon).

5, Korean War = Republican President: Vietnam wasn't enough no sir so the GOP dragged us kicking and screaming into another east Asian war (excuse me "police action" that would be).

6. Mexican-American War = Democratic President: this war of aggression against Mexico goes even further back than the American Civil War so, if in your view the latter doesn't count against a changed Republican party, how in the world can you hold with a straight face that this one should count against a Democratic party that too has changed over time?

7. Iraq War (there were actually two) = Republican President: need I really say more (the GOP started this mess in search of weapons of mass destruction [B]mission accomplished[/B])?

8. Revolutionary War = Non-partisan President: no comment other than this one goes [B]way, way[/B] back!

9. Spanish-American War = Republican President: the GOP was in the White House when this "yellow journalism" fueled war allowed one of the most disgusting Republican war mongers of all time Theodore Roosevelt to rise to fame and eventually seize the Oval Office himself.

10. Afghanistan War = Republican President: well old Georgie boy was at it again, and Donald Chump left Biden standing there holding a stinky bag of shit!

What say ye now my fellows?

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2806337]TK, I just showed you that you have no data to back that up.

Take your worker in Colombia versus El Salvador where the dollar is used versus a native currency.
So are you for people being poorer? And then there is this bullshit about USA oppression? The truth is the USA has done a better job of managing its currency than Colombia has and almost all other parts of the world. Only Europe and the Euro can come close.

And BRICS? China is the largest economy in BRICS, and their currency is propped up and pegged to the dollar.

Everything with you is the USA abuses other nations when the truth is so many countries print up money to solve their problems thus devaluing their currency.

The USA has never defaulted on its debt. Your blaming the USA lets those nations and their shitty monetary policies off the hook.

There are plenty of instances of American policy fucking countries up. Maybe you can name a few where the USA is actually guilty of doing something wrong versus just blaming us for everything.[/QUOTE]I have no data to back it up? Back what up exactly? TBH I have no idea what you are talking abot there.

Colombia v El Salvador. Again, no idea what claim you are trying to make. Just a random story without any clear purpose.

About the dollar bing a strong currency and others being weak. All of this was bcos of the petrodollar. US economy and dollar has been supported by US bullying of other countries in to mandaory use of dollar to buy oil. Its nothing more than that. But those days are over. Now Saudi is, France, Japan, Brazil, Russia, China, 20 countiries are all chooisng to ditch the dollar. So that USA can no longer bully them.

"Maybe you can name a few where the USA is actually guilty of doing something wrong" - you serious? Whch week? Just this past week I can name 3.

1 USA bulying Mexico bcos govt wants to buy operate state owned power plants. USA wants the Mex energy industry open to US corporate exploitation.

2 USA bullying Saudi bcos Russia and China have brokered peace deals with Syria and Iran. USA does not want peace, it wants constant militray oppression of Iran and Syria.

3. USA bullying UN Sec Council not to open investigation in to casue of Nord Stream pipeline terrorism. Its obvious why USA doesn't want this bcos it committed a gross terrorist action against soverign infrastructure and caused huge environmental and financial damage.

Its every week. It seems ever clearer that the USA is a sinking ship, no different to any other fallen empire. Its is getting desperate to hold on to power, that is clear in its ever more belligerent and authoritarian stance, both domestically and internationally. Yet it can do nothing to change it. The tide has turned. Thank goodness.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2806012]Now, the only thing I recall you providing that suggested those Happy Days under Ike were good for the working man was some opinion piece where the dude who wrote it said so without any linked data to substantiate that opinion.

By stark contrast, I provided links showing the USA suffered through three, not one, not two, but three Recessions during Ike's 8 years in office, that his economy produced one of the worst jobs creating records in the past century and that the working man in America was so opposed to him and his Party that every major labor union in the country endorsed his right hand man's Dem opponent in 1960.

You got anything to refute the actual data, the verifiable record of results and the historical facts about that yet? Or do you only have your recommendation to watch a couple of episodes of Happy Days to see how much fun it looked like Ritchie and The Fonz were having at the time?[/QUOTE]Who cares. Eisenhower is ancient history. Saying he's representative of the modern Republican Party makes about as much sense as saying the Democrats who held back Civil Rights reforms in the 1950's and 1960's are representative of the Democratic Party today. Maximum marginal tax rates during the Eisenhower administration were 91%, for goodness sake. The economy, coincidentally or not, did take off when Kennedy cut tax rates, to 70% for the top bracket. While I wasn't alive when Eisenhower was president, I suspect he didn't do a bad job compared to the others. According to the history books, you can attribute the recessions to Fed policy, not the fact that the president was a Republican.

In my book the only great president during our adult lifetimes was Ronald Reagan, and Clinton during his second term was the only good one. Again coincidentally or not, GDP grew more during their terms than other modern Presidents. But it's their policies and their abilities to work across the aisle that set them above the rest. George H. W. Bush wasn't bad either. He was handicapped by when he came to the office in relation to the economic cycle.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806785]I have no data to back it up? Back what up exactly? TBH I have no idea what you are talking abot there.

Colombia v El Salvador. Again, no idea what claim you are trying to make. Just a random story without any clear purpose.

About the dollar bing a strong currency and others being weak. All of this was bcos of the petrodollar. US economy and dollar has been supported by US bullying of other countries in to mandaory use of dollar to buy oil. Its nothing more than that. But those days are over. Now Saudi is, France, Japan, Brazil, Russia, China, 20 countiries are all chooisng to ditch the dollar. So that USA can no longer bully them.

"Maybe you can name a few where the USA is actually guilty of doing something wrong" - you serious? Whch week? Just this past week I can name 3.

1 USA bulying Mexico bcos govt wants to buy operate state owned power plants. USA wants the Mex energy industry open to US corporate exploitation.

2 USA bullying Saudi bcos Russia and China have brokered peace deals with Syria and Iran. USA does not want peace, it wants constant militray oppression of Iran and Syria.

3. USA bullying UN Sec Council not to open investigation in to casue of Nord Stream pipeline terrorism. Its obvious why USA doesn't want this bcos it committed a gross terrorist action against soverign infrastructure and caused huge environmental and financial damage.

Its every week. It seems ever clearer that the USA is a sinking ship, no different to any other fallen empire. Its is getting desperate to hold on to power, that is clear in its ever more belligerent and authoritarian stance, both domestically and internationally. Yet it can do nothing to change it. The tide has turned. Thank goodness.[/QUOTE]I agree with you on "2".

I disagree on "3", as based on what I've read, I believe Ukrainians are responsible for the action against the pipeline. Although it wouldn't surprise me if the USA is covering for the Ukrainians.

I'm not sure about "1. " Normally I'd say that nationalizing Mexican power plants is stupid, especially given how Pemex (the inefficient, corrupt national oil company) has turned out. It's a basket case. But crony capitalism is rampant in Mexico. Look at Cemex and Carlos Slim, who gouge consumers. I suspect it's a bad move on AMLO's part, as the power plants are owned by private Spanish interests, which probably operate more efficiently and in the long run will deliver electricity at cheaper prices than the Mexican state. Unlike the Mexican crony capitalists and the narcotraficantes, the Spanish probably aren't buying off the politicians and bureaucrats. Yes, it does seem like this is a matter for the Mexicans and the Spanish. A little off topic, I believe U.S. investment in Mexico has benefited both countries. Most here would probably disagree with me.

[QUOTE=TheCane;2806717]Yours is one of the most disingenuous, intellectually dishonest posts that I have read in a long, long time. Let's have a look at the 10 deadliest wars in American history:

[URL]https://www.marketwatch.com/story/americas-10-deadliest-wars-2014-05-23[/URL]

1. American Civil War = Republican President: and to say that it doesn't count because it was a different Republican party from a long time ago is a bunch of malarky!

2. World War 2 = Democratic President: America was sucker punched by Japan and Hitler was running amuck around Europe and North Africa. If ever there was a war worth fighting this one was it!

3. World War 1 = Democratic President: we should have dealt with the Hun more appropriately then (was too punitive a peace towards Germany), and had we, then we could have headed off the rise of the Nazis.

4. Vietnam War = Republican President: to be fair this tragic war spanned a number of administrations, but it was a Republican who got us into it (Eisenhower) and a Republican who oversaw our shameful withdrawal in defeat from it (Nixon).

5, Korean War = Republican President: Vietnam wasn't enough no sir so the GOP dragged us kicking and screaming into another east Asian war (excuse me "police action" that would be).

6. Mexican-American War = Democratic President: this war of aggression against Mexico goes even further back than the American Civil War so, if in your view the latter doesn't count against a changed Republican party, how in the world can you hold with a straight face that this one should count against a Democratic party that too has changed over time?

7. Iraq War (there were actually two) = Republican President: need I really say more (the GOP started this mess in search of weapons of mass destruction [B]mission accomplished[/B])?

8. Revolutionary War = Non-partisan President: no comment other than this one goes [B]way, way[/B] back!

9. Spanish-American War = Republican President: the GOP was in the White House when this "yellow journalism" fueled war allowed one of the most disgusting Republican war mongers of all time Theodore Roosevelt to rise to fame and eventually seize the Oval Office himself.

10. Afghanistan War = Republican President: well old Georgie boy was at it again, and Donald Chump left Biden standing there holding a stinky bag of shit!

What say ye now my fellows?[/QUOTE]Cane, PLEASE READ. And perhaps look up the definitions of "satirical", "spurious correlaton" and "cause and effect" if you don't know what those mean. I said, "I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans. " I don't know how I could have been clearer:

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2806702][b]And this post, like all my others on this topic, is satirical. Like I said, there's no cause and effect. For some reason Tooms feels compelled to argue against what I'm labeling as a spurious correlation. I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans.[/b][/QUOTE]Again, if you're going to illogically hold the modern day Republican Party responsible for the Civil War, then it's only fair that you illogically hold today's Democrats responsible for slavery, Jim Crow and repression of Civil Rights. And it's a little ridiculous to hold Eisenhower responsible for 58,000 deaths in Vietnam, when he was only around for 9 of them. The icing on the cake is that then you criticize Nixon for getting us out of the same war that Eisenhower allegedly got us into!

Vietnam was a bipartisan war, and like I said, I don't see the logic in calling LBJ the responsible party when only two members of the Senate and House voted against the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.

Please note that the Korean War went from June, 1950, when Truman was president, to July, 1953. Eisenhower took office in January, 1953. FYI, Truman was a Democrat.

Also please note my spurious correlation that showed over 95% of American military deaths [b] in the 20th and 21st centuries [/b] were attributable to Democratic Presidents would only apply to wars fought after 1900. If you’ve got a problem with that, please take more time to understand what “spurious correlation” means.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2806827]Cane, PLEASE READ. And perhaps look up the definitions of "satirical", "spurious correlaton" and "cause and effect" if you don't know what those mean. I said, "I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans. " I don't know how I could have been clearer.[/QUOTE]I made my points, which were also intended to be in part satirical. I see they had the intended effect hehehe! And by the way, those same Democrats were the ones who eventually got onboard with the civil rights movement and passed significant civil rights legislation. This is why the majority of African Americans identify with the Democratic party today. And the southerners who still objected they turned to the Republican party, the party of Lincoln. How ironic. Things, including political parties, can and do change. And truth can be stranger than fiction.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2806786]Who cares. Eisenhower is ancient history. Saying he's representative of the modern Republican Party makes about as much sense as saying the Democrats who held back Civil Rights reforms in the 1950's and 1960's are representative of the Democratic Party today. Maximum marginal tax rates during the Eisenhower administration were 91%, for goodness sake. The economy, coincidentally or not, did take off when Kennedy cut tax rates, to 70% for the top bracket. While I wasn't alive when Eisenhower was president, I suspect he didn't do a bad job compared to the others. According to the history books, you can attribute the recessions to Fed policy, not the fact that the president was a Republican.

In my book the only great president during our adult lifetimes was Ronald Reagan, and Clinton during his second term was the only good one. Again coincidentally or not, GDP grew more during their terms than other modern Presidents. But it's their policies and their abilities to work across the aisle that set them above the rest. George H. W. Bush wasn't bad either. He was handicapped by when he came to the office in relation to the economic cycle.[/QUOTE]If course the dragging, poor jobs-creating Eisenhower economy took off after Kennedy's tax cuts. That is one of the main reasons I vote for Dems and have said so many times; I LOVE their tax cuts because they WORK to produce jobs and expand the economy, unlike Repub tax cuts that work quite well to produce Great Depressions / Great Recessions and destroy jobs by the millions.

Here's the deal: Kennedy's tax cuts were not Repub-style Supply-Side / Trickle-Down tax cuts disproportionately high for the top income margin and paid for by everyone else. Far from it. The percent of cuts to the middle and lower income margins was greater than the percentage for the top margin, particularly when you factor in the allowances in the tax code.

That would be the OPPOSITE of what Repubs celebrate and congratulate themselves for with their disproportionately high tax cuts for the wealthy.

LOL. Repubs and Bothsider / Neithersider Repubs always point to Kennedy's cut for the top margin from 90% or so to 70% or so, never mention the rest of it and try to bamboozle anyone who will listen into swallowing that as proof that their beloved tax cuts for the wealthy is the way to create jobs and expand the economy like FDR did, Truman did Kennedy / LBJ did, Carter did, Clinton did, Obama did and Biden has by just putting more money into the pockets of wealthy people and nothing about the far more difficut work on all those other devilishly complicated details.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2806790]I agree with you on "2".
I disagree on "3".
I'm not sure about "1. [/QUOTE]But Tiny, God damn, your missing the entire point! Its not about whether you think USA Govt position is right or wrong. Its about them trying to enforce what they want on other soveriegn nations. What right do they have to dictate in this matters? Since WW2 they think they have some god given right, or exceptionalism that permits them to do it. But that IS BS. It is just bullying might is right mafia big boss tactics.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806974]But Tiny, God damn, your missing the entire point! Its not about whether you think USA Govt position is right or wrong. Its about them trying to enforce what they want on other soveriegn nations. What right do they have to dictate in this matters? Since WW2 they think they have some god given right, or exceptionalism that permits them to do it. But that IS BS. It is just bullying might is right mafia big boss tactics.[/QUOTE]In general terms, I agree. I would have used different examples, like imposing FATCA on every financial institution in the world. And placing sanctions on China and Iran that affect every country. I'd mention Russia, but the EU's sanctions are possibly more stringent than the USA's.

As to violence and mayhem, the USA may have gotten better in the last decade or so. It's not as inclined to overthrow foreign governments as it has been historically. Or maybe it's just better at covering its tracks. Or maybe we'll forget the lessons of Iraq, like we forgot the lessons of Vietnam. When you've got a military budget larger than the next nine highest countries put together I guess you're inclined to throw your weight around.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2806980]In general terms, I agree. I would have used different examples, like imposing FATCA on every financial institution in the world. And placing sanctions on China and Iran that affect every country. I'd mention Russia, but the EU's sanctions are possibly more stringent than the USA's.

As to violence and mayhem, the USA may have gotten better in the last decade or so. It's not as inclined to overthrow foreign governments as it has been historically. Or maybe it's just better at covering its tracks. Or maybe we'll forget the lessons of Iraq, like we forgot the lessons of Vietnam. When you've got a military budget larger than the next nine highest countries put together I guess you're inclined to throw your weight around.[/QUOTE]Agree with everything you wrote. As for the examples I chose. Sure, there are better examples. But Elvis was showing a short memory and seems to think I never have any examples. So I choose from the past week. :)

I think the USA has overthrown fewer governments recently simply bcos it is not capable. It is not for the want of trying.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806997]But Elvis was showing a short memory and seems to think I never have any examples. So I choose from the past week. [/QUOTE]Nope, that is not what I meant. I meant if you are going to accuse the USA of bad things, find an example where we have done something wrong. There are tons of examples: USA / Iran 1953, USA / Guatemala 1954, USA / Chile 1970's.

However, you were talking like the USA is in danger because BRICs nations are going to quit using the dollar when the dollar is the strongest currency the world has known for centuries.

My example of Colombia and El Salvador was to show you that the working middle class / poor were far better off keeping their savings in evil USA dollars than their wonderful native currencies. I showed you that all those BRICs currencies have went to shit.

And when you say this, you still do not get it.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806785]About the dollar bing a strong currency and others being weak. All of this was bcos of the petrodollar.[/QUOTE]The dollar was the dominant currency before OPEC had any real power. The notion that oil is paid for with dollars meaning anything is negligible because those dollars can instantly be changed into any other commodity or currency. In fact, the Saudis have smartly learned to convert those dollars into shares of corporate stock to get even more money. You once again are showing your financial naivete.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806785]US economy and dollar has been supported by US bullying of other countries in to mandaory use of dollar to buy oil. Its nothing more than that. But those days are over. Now Saudi is, France, Japan, Brazil, Russia, China, 20 countiries are all chooisng to ditch the dollar. So that USA can no longer bully them.[/QUOTE]If Saudi Arabia is paid in Euros, can it change those Euros instantly into USA dollars? If so, why does it matter what they are paid in? And ultimately, a currency means a storage of value. I just showed you where holding currencies other than the USA dollar has been a fool's game. Again, you do not get it.

As for "those days being over", you miss the two larger points. Are you going to move a supertanker without insurance? And who dominates the shipping insurance industry? Argentina and Venezuela typically cannot get insurance for their cargo, and you can see where their economies have gone. This insurance issue has been quite the problem for Russia trading with China.

Then there is the USA navy and piracy. We the American taxpayer are paying for safety on the seas. World piracy is negligible because of the USA navy.

And that is where you are missing the point. People have to have faith the USA dollar will not go to shit. They have to have faith an insurance company will pay if disaster hits. And they have to have faith their cargo is not going to be seized by pirates.

You can do all the financial engineering you want. At the end of the day, the USA dollar, insurance industry, and Navy have been trustworthy, and you cannot get that faith and trust with a cheap financial engineering trick.

I cannot believe you went to Venezuela and believed all the hogwash about the USA. Venezuela should be as rich as Saudi Arabia if Venezuela were as trustworthy. The Venezuelan culture unlike the Arab culture and culture in Chile is one in which stealing is okay. Because of that, I would not buy anything in Venezuela that can easily be stolen, and they have earned that lack of faith.

I do not think you understand how important faith is when it comes to financial institutions.

[QUOTE=TheCane;2806934]I made my points, which were also intended to be in part satirical. I see they had the intended effect hehehe![b] And by the way, those same Democrats were the ones who eventually got onboard with the civil rights movement and passed significant civil rights legislation. This is why the majority of African Americans identify with the Democratic party today. And the southerners who still objected they turned to the Republican party, the party of Lincoln. [/b] How ironic. Things, including political parties, can and do change. And truth can be stranger than fiction.[/QUOTE]OK, Cane, you got me. As to the bold print, that's not necessarily true, or at least not where I live. See this, my reply to PVMonger.

[URL]http://www.internationalsexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?2467-American-Politics&p=2787118&viewfull=1#post2787118[/URL].

The world is very different today than it was 60 or 70 years ago. I believe most people in the USA are not racist. I'd contrast the USA to Thailand, Japan and Argentina, and ask Tooms to weigh in if I could catch him in a nonpartisan mood. But this is better not discussed here, as I believe the moderators rightly prefer we stay away from race as a topic.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2806936]Dem Tax Cuts Good. Repub Tax Cuts Crap.[/QUOTE]Exactly. A Republican and a Democratic president could sign the same legislation into law and you'd praise one and criticize the other. If Clinton hadn't been president when the capital gains tax was cut to 20%, I'm sure you'd criticize the cut.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2806936]If course the dragging, poor jobs-creating Eisenhower economy took off after Kennedy's tax cuts. That is one of the main reasons I vote for Dems and have said so many times; I LOVE their tax cuts because they WORK to produce jobs and expand the economy, unlike Repub tax cuts that work quite well to produce Great Depressions / Great Recessions and destroy jobs by the millions.

Here's the deal: Kennedy's tax cuts were not Repub-style Supply-Side / Trickle-Down tax cuts disproportionately high for the top income margin and paid for by everyone else. Far from it. The percent of cuts to the middle and lower income margins was greater than the percentage for the top margin, particularly when you factor in the allowances in the tax code.

That would be the OPPOSITE of what Repubs celebrate and congratulate themselves for with their disproportionately high tax cuts for the wealthy.

LOL. Repubs and Bothsider / Neithersider Repubs always point to Kennedy's cut for the top margin from 90% or so to 70% or so, never mention the rest of it and try to bamboozle anyone who will listen into swallowing that as proof that their beloved tax cuts for the wealthy is the way to create jobs and expand the economy like FDR did, Truman did Kennedy / LBJ did, Carter did, Clinton did, Obama did and Biden has by just putting more money into the pockets of wealthy people and nothing about the far more difficut work on all those other devilishly complicated details.[/QUOTE]That's just not true as to the tax rate cuts that occurred under Bush and Trump. In percentage terms, the total tax on ordinary income paid by people in lower brackets reduced more than those in higher brackets. Overall the USA Has the most progressive tax system in the developed world, when you include VAT, sales taxes, property taxes, federal and state income taxes, and the employee's share of social security and Medicare CONTRIBUTIONS.

The overall level of taxation and government spending is what's much more important than the progressivity of the system though. The USA and Ireland have very progressive tax systems. Hong Kong has very regressive taxation. Yet all three of these countries (using the term "country" loosely for Hong Kong) overall have among the lowest government revenues and spending (as a % of GDP) and the highest levels of GDP per capita, adjusted for purchasing power. The key is smaller, ideally more efficient government. If the government takes a smaller piece of the pie, that means the private sector takes a larger piece. And the private sector is the engine of jobs and growth. A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses.

And that's where the current crop of Democrats, unlike Kennedy and perhaps Clinton, have it wrong. They want to make the USA into Europe. And if they're successful, the prosperity of the country will suffer.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806997]Agree with everything you wrote. As for the examples I chose. Sure, there are better examples. But Elvis was showing a short memory and seems to think I never have any examples. So I choose from the past week. :)

I think the USA has overthrown fewer governments recently simply bcos it is not capable. It is not for the want of trying.[/QUOTE]A couple of other examples came to mind. Impounding the foreign dollar reserves of Iran and Russia, taking assets away from Russian citizens, and imposing an embargo on Cuba were not ideal ways to win friends.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2807043]Exactly. A Republican and a Democratic president could sign the same legislation into law and you'd praise one and criticize the other. If Clinton hadn't been president when the capital gains tax was cut to 20%, I'm sure you'd criticize the cut.

That's just not true as to the tax rate cuts that occurred under Bush and Trump. In percentage terms, the total tax on ordinary income paid by people in lower brackets reduced more than those in higher brackets. Overall the USA Has the most progressive tax system in the developed world, when you include VAT, sales taxes, property taxes, federal and state income taxes, and the employee's share of social security and Medicare CONTRIBUTIONS.

The overall level of taxation and government spending is what's much more important than the progressivity of the system though. The USA and Ireland have very progressive tax systems. Hong Kong has very regressive taxation. Yet all three of these countries (using the term "country" loosely for Hong Kong) overall have among the lowest government revenues and spending (as a % of GDP) and the highest levels of GDP per capita, adjusted for purchasing power. The key is smaller, ideally more efficient government. If the government takes a smaller piece of the pie, that means the private sector takes a larger piece. And the private sector is the engine of jobs and growth. A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses.

And that's where the current crop of Democrats, unlike Kennedy and perhaps Clinton, have it wrong. They want to make the USA into Europe. And if they're successful, the prosperity of the country will suffer.[/QUOTE]The Repub cuts for all but the super wealthy and corporations under Trump were set to expire within the next couple of election cycles but those for the super wealthy and corporations were not. Consequently, Trump's jobs creation record was crap, especially when you factor in the cost of them, even before he created Trump's Pandemic.

Biden and the Dems' extention of the middle and lower tax cuts are, by definition, Dem Tax Cuts.

And, as usual, they have worked to expand the economy and create millions upon millions of jobs.

GW Bush's Treasury Dept's total lack of attention to anything other than celebrating their unnecessary tax cuts just for show crashed the economy well and surely enough without worry over who got the most tea and cookies before Bush's Titanic sank.

Those pesky details again.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2807043]Exactly. A Republican and a Democratic president could sign the same legislation into law and you'd praise one and criticize the other. If Clinton hadn't been president when the capital gains tax was cut to 20%, I'm sure you'd criticize the cut.

That's just not true as to the tax rate cuts that occurred under Bush and Trump. In percentage terms, the total tax on ordinary income paid by people in lower brackets reduced more than those in higher brackets. Overall the USA Has the most progressive tax system in the developed world, when you include VAT, sales taxes, property taxes, federal and state income taxes, and the employee's share of social security and Medicare CONTRIBUTIONS.

The overall level of taxation and government spending is what's much more important than the progressivity of the system though. The USA and Ireland have very progressive tax systems. Hong Kong has very regressive taxation. Yet all three of these countries (using the term "country" loosely for Hong Kong) overall have among the lowest government revenues and spending (as a % of GDP) and the highest levels of GDP per capita, adjusted for purchasing power. The key is smaller, ideally more efficient government. If the government takes a smaller piece of the pie, that means the private sector takes a larger piece. And the private sector is the engine of jobs and growth. A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses.

And that's where the current crop of Democrats, unlike Kennedy and perhaps Clinton, have it wrong. They want to make the USA into Europe. And if they're successful, the prosperity of the country will suffer.[/QUOTE]But the tax policies enacted by Clinton and his Dem Congress of 1993 and 1994 led directly to the historic economic expansion and jobs creation of the years that folliwed. Until GW Bush took over with his Repub Congress, got his Repub way and Crashed the economy. And that was despite Nude Grinbitch and his House Repubs trying everything possible to Crash it under Clinton but failing to do so.

So, what was there to criticize about Clinton's economic stewardship? There was no Repub-style economic disaster resulting from it. But Repubs of his day sure warned us there would be. LOL. Pretty much the same way you and other current Repubs say the current crop of Democrats "have it wrong. ".

You think those ancient history Repubs in Kennedy's day weren't telling us the world will come to an end if he gets his way economically? The same for FDR? And most certainly for Clinton, Obama and now Biden?

Your beloved Repubs are ALWAYS wrong about how Dem economic policies and stewardship will destroy the world while theirs are superior. Always. And in the most polar opposite way. Obviously and according to any data and record of results you've got.

"A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses. ".

Lololol.

Except when Repubs like Coolidge / Hoover, Reagan, GW Bush and Trump decide who gets to keep more money in their hands and who gets to leave it to them. Then the country plunges into historic Great Depressions / Great Recessions and Massive Job Losses in the Millions.

Lolol.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807028]Nope, that is not what I meant. I meant if you are going to accuse the USA of bad things, find an example where we have done something wrong. There are tons of examples: USA / Iran 1953, USA / Guatemala 1954, USA / Chile 1970's.

However, you were talking like the USA is in danger because BRICs nations are going to quit using the dollar when the dollar is the strongest currency the world has known for centuries.

My example of Colombia and El Salvador was to show you that the working middle class / poor were far better off keeping their savings in evil USA dollars than their wonderful native currencies. I showed you that all those BRICs currencies have went to shit.
[/QUOTE]Then you misrepresent my position. I gave you several examples of USA doing smthg wrong. Tiny gave you some others. There are more examples every week.

I never said BRICS was going to stop using dollar. I explicitly said they would come up w a an alternative and not a replacement.

I also didn't say the dollar was evil. I say the US govt is evil. I have no issue w countries using the USD if they freely prefer to do so.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807028]

The dollar was the dominant currency before OPEC had any real power. The notion that oil is paid for with dollars meaning anything is negligible because those dollars can instantly be changed into any other commodity or currency. In fact, the Saudis have smartly learned to convert those dollars into shares of corporate stock to get even more money. You once again are showing your financial naivete.
[/QUOTE]Gold was the dominant currency. Then once WW2 destroyed most of the West, the USA had an open playing field. Elvis, it seems your the one that does not understand the importance of the petro dollar. There are countless articles on it. Here is one: [URL]https://www.avatrade.co.za/education/market-terms/what-is-the-petrodollar[/URL].

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807028]

As for "those days being over", you miss the two larger points. And who dominates the shipping insurance industry? [/QUOTE]I know very little about insurance. I am sure there are several business sectors where the USA maintains hegemony. But those will decline as US petro hegemony declines.


[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807028]

As for "those days being over", you miss the two larger points. And who dominates the shipping insurance industry? [/QUOTE]I know very little about insurance. I am sure there are several business sectors where the USA maintains hegemony. But those will decline as US petro hegemony declines.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807028]
Then there is the USA navy and piracy. [/QUOTE]What? You cannot be serious? Show me some evidence please that the US Navy is a major preventer of acts of theft from Captain Pugwash adn Long john Silver.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807028]
I cannot believe you went to Venezuela and believed all the hogwash about the USA. Venezuela should be as rich as Saudi Arabia....[/QUOTE]Haha Elvis. You have mentioned this countless times. WTF does it have to do w this discussion? I have answered this several times anyway, and it is not relevant to a discussion of threats to the US dollar.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807207]The Repub cuts for all but the super wealthy and corporations under Trump were set to expire within the next couple of election cycles but those for the super wealthy and corporations were not.[/QUOTE]Wrong. The cuts for the "super wealthy," as well as the cuts for the upper middle class, middle class and poor, are scheduled to expire. Democrats and Republicans probably will indeed extend them for the middle class and poor, but not the rich, like they did after the Reagan and Bush tax cuts. This is a large part of the reason why we have the most progressive tax system in the developed world.

And correct, the corporate tax rate cut is not set to expire. Before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), passed in 2017, the USA Federal + state corporate tax rate was the second highest in the world, right behind Comoros. Even Biden doesn't want to take the corporate rate back to where it was.

If we do increase the corporate rate, who will pay for it? Well, first and foremost consumers, in the form of higher prices. Second, workers, who would lose their jobs as industries migrate to lower tax countries. And third, shareholders, some of whom like you seem to suffer from Stockholm Syndrome.

While the government's revenues from the corporate tax cut took a hit after implementation of the TCJA, they're now back up, to the second highest level in history in 2022. Partly this is undoubtedly due to the corporations' motivation to invest and generate income in America as a result of a better tax regime. The better regime resulted not only from the tax cut, but also the TCJA's provisions that resulted in hundreds of billions or trillions of cash being repatriated by American corporations, and implementation of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) tax on foreign earnings of USA Corporations.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807207]Consequently, Trump's jobs creation record was crap, especially when you factor in the [b]cost[/b] of them, even before he created Trump's Pandemic.[/QUOTE]Again, not true. Up until COVID, job generation in the USA continued at a good clip, despite the unemployment rate dropping to the lowest since the 1960's. When you're closer to full employment, job creation should slow. The fact that it didn't is due in part to the corporate tax cuts and deregulation. Also, the middle class finally made big gains in income prior to COVID. Unfortunately, those gains largely dissipated as a result of inflation that kicked off after passage of Biden's American Rescue Plan (ARP). You can't attribute inflation in 2021 entirely to the ARP, but it played a big part.

I hate it when Democratic Politicians refer to tax cuts as "costing" something. They're not costs, unless you're some kind of mafioso believes it's a "cost" when you extort less money from people.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807207]Biden and the Dems' extention of the middle and lower tax cuts are, by definition, Dem Tax Cuts.

And, as usual, they have worked to expand the economy and create millions upon millions of jobs.[/QUOTE]So Democrats deserve the credit for the tax cuts in the TCJA, which I believe was passed without a single Democratic vote. That makes perfect sense if your view of the USA Economy is mostly based on "Democrats Good, Republicans Crap. ".

You realize Biden and the Dems haven't extended squat yet? And if rate cuts are extended, it will be bipartisan.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807268]GW Bush's Treasury Dept's total lack of attention to anything other than celebrating their unnecessary tax cuts just for show crashed the economy well and surely enough without worry over who got the most tea and cookies before Bush's Titanic sank.

Those pesky details again.


But the tax policies enacted by Clinton and his Dem Congress of 1993 and 1994 led directly to the historic economic expansion and jobs creation of the years that folliwed. Until GW Bush took over with his Repub Congress, got his Repub way and Crashed the economy. And that was despite Nude Grinbitch and his House Repubs trying everything possible to Crash it under Clinton but failing to do so.[/QUOTE]You're going to have to look far and wide to find an economist who will argue that tax cuts lower GDP growth, or, as to Clinton, vice versa. The only question is how much will lower taxes increase GDP. And what's the effect on the deficit and the national debt if government continues to spend like a drunken sailor.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807207]So, what was there to criticize about Clinton's economic stewardship? There was no Repub-style economic disaster resulting from it. But Repubs of his day sure warned us there would be. LOL. Pretty much the same way you and other current Repubs say the current crop of Democrats "have it wrong. ".

You think those ancient history Repubs in Kennedy's day weren't telling us the world will come to an end if he gets his way economically? The same for FDR? And most certainly for Clinton, Obama and now Biden?

Your beloved Repubs are ALWAYS wrong about how Dem economic policies and stewardship will destroy the world while theirs are superior. Always. And in the most polar opposite way. Obviously and according to any data and record of results you've got.[/QUOTE]More "Democrat Good, Republican Crap" reasoning. In our recent exchange I've praised three presidents for tax legislation passed during their terms, and two were Democrats.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807207]"A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses. ".

Lololol.

Except when Repubs like Coolidge / Hoover, Reagan, GW Bush and Trump decide who gets to keep more money in their hands and who gets to leave it to them. Then the country plunges into historic Great Depressions / Great Recessions and Massive Job Losses in the Millions.

Lolol.[/QUOTE]The difference I see in how the parties decide who gets to keep more money is that the Democrats are marginally more likely to pass it onto crony capitalists. Thus you see California green energy and tech companies benefitting disproportionately from the CHIPS and badly-named Inflation Reduction Acts. And New York contributors to the Democratic Party benefitting from Schumer continuing to pigeon hole provisions to end carried interest treatment of management fees realized by hedge, private equity and venture capital funds.

Good that you're not really arguing about my statement "A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses. " Perhaps there's hope for you yet.

Uff. If only more country leaders had the courage to say it how it really is. Here Fred M'membe of Zambia speaks truth to US power. Watch from 35 sec to 2m 19s.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-617EzlNYTI[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2807400]Then you misrepresent my position. I gave you several examples of USA doing smthg wrong. Tiny gave you some others. There are more examples every week.[/QUOTE]I have heard negativity about the USA all the time. I just wish that it were confined to things where we actually did something wrong like in Iran in 1953. I think you think I am saying the USA is infallible.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2807400]I never said BRICS was going to stop using dollar. I explicitly said they would come up w a an alternative and not a replacement.[/QUOTE]They already have replacements, and I showed you they were all crap.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2807400]I also didn't say the dollar was evil. I say the US govt is evil. I have no issue w countries using the USD if they freely prefer to do so.[/QUOTE]LOL. That is semantics.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2807400]Gold was the dominant currency. Then once WW2 destroyed most of the West, the USA had an open playing field. Elvis, it seems your the one that does not understand the importance of the petro dollar. There are countless articles on it. Here is one: [URL]https://www.avatrade.co.za/education/market-terms/what-is-the-petrodollar[/URL].[/QUOTE]Oh brother. You link an article like that and think you know what you are talking about. Sigh. It was gold backed currencies not gold that were a medium of exchange. The people who are pushing the petrodollar narrative are inevitably pushing gold or cryptocurrency. This is a tired story I have been hearing for decades. The story goes, "We are giving paper for valuable useful items like oil and printing up dollars like tomorrow out of thin air". These fools have not even updated their bullshit to reflect reality where the USA become a net exporter of crude, [URL]https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-poised-become-net-exporter-crude-oil-2023-2022-12-19/[/URL].

And from your article is this "However, the biggest threat to the petrodollar is the potential of the petroyuan. " LOL. No, the biggest threat to the "petrodollar" (a dumb term as it is just a USA dollar used to buy oil) is the fact that the USA no longer needs to buy oil.

Besides the yuan is pegged to the dollar. You buy oil with yuan and convert it into dollars. It is not that big of a deal. And the great threat to the USA dollar is #5 in term of currency exchange.

[URL]https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202212/1282409.shtml[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2807400]I know very little about insurance. What? You cannot be serious? Show me some evidence please that the US Navy is a major preventer of acts of theft from Captain Pugwash and Long john Silver.[/QUOTE]So you do not understand the insurance industry or the role of the USA navy in global trade? If you do not understand those items, then any prediction on where currencies are headed is bound to be wrong. And your comment on the USA navy just shows me that you are only interested in the bad things the USA does and none of the good.

Why can't you google a story on USA navy and its history on piracy? Afraid you might read something positive on the USA military?

[QUOTE=JustTK;2806997]Agree with everything you wrote. As for the examples I chose. Sure, there are better examples. But Elvis was showing a short memory and seems to think I never have any examples. So I choose from the past week. :)

I think the USA has overthrown fewer governments recently simply bcos it is not capable. It is not for the want of trying.[/QUOTE]Bullshit.

It's exactly because we've learned our lesson. When the Venezuelan military organized a coup against Chavez in 2002, not only did we refuse to support it, but warned Chavez about the plot (to the detriment of millions of Venezuelans I must add).

With so many truly homicidal and sadistic regimes around the world, it's really funny how these Europeans love to poke at America. Never Russia, but America. Never North Korea, never Iran, never Myanmar, never Cuba.

Well, whatever floats your boat. We don't give a shit.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2807450]Wrong. The cuts for the "super wealthy," as well as the cuts for the upper middle class, middle class and poor, are scheduled to expire. Democrats and Republicans probably will indeed extend them for the middle class and poor, but not the rich, like they did after the Reagan and Bush tax cuts. This is a large part of the reason why we have the most progressive tax system in the developed world.

And correct, the corporate tax rate cut is not set to expire. Before the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), passed in 2017, the USA Federal + state corporate tax rate was the second highest in the world, right behind Comoros. Even Biden doesn't want to take the corporate rate back to where it was.[/QUOTE]Wrong? And then you repeat essentially the same thing I wrote? LOL.

Biden has put it in his budget. Yes, maybe these Dem Tax Cuts will get some bipartisan support when they pass. But the extensions were not Trump's idea or the RePutinKlan Party's idea.

[B]Bidens tax hikes on high earners are unlikely to make it through Congress. A bigger debate: the Trump-era tax cuts that expire in 2025.[/B]

[URL]https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bidens-tax-hikes-for-the-rich-are-unlikely-to-get-passed-by-congress-but-another-date-looms-trump-era-tax-cuts-for-the-wealthy-end-in-2025-8fdf3195[/URL]

[QUOTE][b]Tiny12:[/b]If we do increase the corporate rate, who will pay for it? Well, first and foremost consumers, in the form of higher prices. Second, workers, who would lose their jobs as industries migrate to lower tax countries. And third, shareholders, some of whom like you seem to suffer from Stockholm Syndrome.

While the government's revenues from the corporate tax cut took a hit after implementation of the TCJA, they're now back up, to the second highest level in history in 2022. Partly this is undoubtedly due to the corporations' motivation to invest and generate income in America as a result of a better tax regime. The better regime resulted not only from the tax cut, but also the TCJA's provisions that resulted in hundreds of billions or trillions of cash being repatriated by American corporations, and implementation of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) tax on foreign earnings of USA Corporations.

Again, not true. Up until COVID, job generation in the USA continued at a good clip, despite the unemployment rate dropping to the lowest since the 1960's. When you're closer to full employment, job creation should slow. The fact that it didn't is due in part to the corporate tax cuts and deregulation. Also, the middle class finally made big gains in income prior to COVID. Unfortunately, those gains largely dissipated as a result of inflation that kicked off after passage of Biden's American Rescue Plan (ARP). You can't attribute inflation in 2021 entirely to the ARP, but it played a big part.

I hate it when Democratic Politicians refer to tax cuts as "costing" something. They're not costs, unless you're some kind of mafioso believes it's a "cost" when you extort less money from people.

So Democrats deserve the credit for the tax cuts in the TCJA, which I believe was passed without a single Democratic vote. That makes perfect sense if your view of the USA Economy is mostly based on "Democrats Good, Republicans Crap. ".

You realize Biden and the Dems haven't extended squat yet? And if rate cuts are extended, it will be bipartisan.

You're going to have to look far and wide to find an economist who will argue that tax cuts lower GDP growth, or, as to Clinton, vice versa. The only question is how much will lower taxes increase GDP. And what's the effect on the deficit and the national debt if government continues to spend like a drunken sailor.

More "Democrat Good, Republican Crap" reasoning. In our recent exchange I've praised three presidents for tax legislation passed during their terms, and two were Democrats.

The difference I see in how the parties decide who gets to keep more money is that the Democrats are marginally more likely to pass it onto crony capitalists. Thus you see California green energy and tech companies benefitting disproportionately from the CHIPS and badly-named Inflation Reduction Acts. And New York contributors to the Democratic Party benefitting from Schumer continuing to pigeon hole provisions to end carried interest treatment of management fees realized by hedge, private equity and venture capital funds.

Good that you're not really arguing about my statement "A country is more prosperous when more money is left in the hands of its people and its businesses. " Perhaps there's hope for you yet. [/QUOTE]Lolol.

All the typical academic, theoretical, non Real World hand-wringing worries RePutinKlans always bring to the table and weep about all over the more-than-eager pro Repub Mainstream Media.

[B]News Bulletin:[/B]

All of those terrible economic outcomes do not happen under Dem economic stewardship. They only happen under RePutinKlan economic stewardship.

You know, like the RePutinKlan Great Depression and Massive Jobs Destruction of 1929-1933, the Great Reagan RePutinKlan Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction, The Great GW Bush RePutinKlan Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction, the Great Trump's Pandemic Economic Stewardship Disaster and Massive Jobs Destruction, etc.

Dem Tax Cuts get paid for without wiping out millions of jobs, without triggering Great Depressions or Great Recessions as Repub tax cuts do. Don't worry your pretty little Repub head about that.

Oh, and then there was this after, among other blunders, worse-then-drunken-sailors Trump and his Repubs flushed $2. 5+ Trillion in tax payer money down the shitter with nothing to show for it but a million fewer jobs with his horrific TCJA for the wrong people at the wrong time in the wrong amounts than without it:

[B]The Trump administration was ruining the pre-COVID-19 economy too, just more slowly[/B]

[URL]https://www.epi.org/blog/the-trump-administration-was-ruining-the-pre-covid-19-19-economy-too-just-more-slowly/[/URL]

[QUOTE]Key takeaways:

Long before the COVID-19 pandemic the Trump administration was squandering the pockets of strength in the American economy it had inherited.

Broad-based prosperity requires strength on the supply, demand, and distributive sides of the economy, and Trump administration policies were either weak or outright damaging on these fronts.

Demand: Most of the Trump tax cuts went to already-rich corporations and households, who tend to save rather than spend most of any extra dollar theyre given.

Supply: Business investment plummeted under the Trump administration, despite their lavishing tax cuts on corporate business.

Distribution: The Trump administration undercut labor standards and rules that can buttress workers bargaining power. [/QUOTE][B]Trump will have the worst jobs record in modern USA History. Its not just the pandemic. [/B]

[URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/01/08/trump-jobs-record/[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807621]

[b]I See Great Sources Were Provided For Your Flight of Fantasy. Thanks.[/b][/QUOTE]That's right. I don't need no stinking, bull shit sources. Like highly biased, partisan pieces from the Economic Policy Institute and Washington Post Editorial Page. Because I actually know what I'm writing about. As to tax policy anyway.

This is somewhat like when you gentlemen demanded a "link" to my Bloomberg feed when I posted YoY changes in GDP for various countries, to show that the decline in GDP other large developed countries was higher than the decline in the USA during your so-called "Trump Pandemic".

Granted Tooms, you don't know as much about taxes as I do. But you're perfectly capable of Googling phrases like,

Which country has the most progressive tax system.

GILTI tax.

Repatriation after TCJA.

Extension of TCJA tax cuts.

Nonfarm employment St. Louis Fed.

Unemployment St. Louis Fed.

Median Household Income St. Louis Fed.

Who Bears the Burden of Corporate Income Tax.

Effect of taxes on GDP.

CHIPS and Science act.

Inflation Reduction Act.

Schumer Carried Interest.

Frankly, I'm tired of educating you, because you're a very poor student.

And this is absolutely hilarious, a great exercise in Double Think:

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807621]Oh, and then there was this after, among other blunders, worse-then-drunken-sailors Trump and his Repubs flushed $2. 5+ Trillion in tax payer money down the shitter with nothing to show for it but a million fewer jobs with his horrific TCJA for the wrong people at the wrong time in the wrong amounts than without it:[/QUOTE]If Biden and Congress had extended all the provisions of the TCJA instead of letting most of them expire, then the TCJA was estimated to result in a $2. 5 trillion reduction in tax revenue over 10 years. That's money that stays in the pocket of the taxpayer, the exact opposite of what you said. Flushing money down the shitter is commonly what the federal government does after it COLLECTS taxes. If you collect $2. 5 trillion less from taxpayers, then that's $2. 5 trillion less that can be flushed down the shitter. That's ignoring the fact that the bastards in Washington are a bunch of spendthrifts who have no problem spending a lot more money than they take in.

BTW, your marketwatch link supports my explanation, not yours.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807621]Re(publican)PutinKlan[/QUOTE]Yeah, that phrase you use over and over about sums it up, doesn't it.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807621]Dem Tax Cuts get paid for without wiping out millions of jobs, without triggering Great Depressions or Great Recessions as Repub tax cuts do. Don't worry your pretty little Repub head about that.

Oh, and then there was this after, among other blunders, worse-then-drunken-sailors Trump and his Repubs flushed $2. 5+ Trillion in tax payer money down the shitter with nothing to show for it but a million fewer jobs with his horrific TCJA for the wrong people at the wrong time in the wrong amounts than without it[/QUOTE]At first read, I figured you just didn't know much about economics. Even Paul Krugman would never argue that tax cuts wipe out millions of jobs or cause Great Depressions or Great Recessions. In fact, he'd undoubtedly say tax cuts have a positive effect on GDP growth and jobs. Admittedly though he's just as partisan as you are and would find some way to criticize any bill passed by Republicans. But anyway initially I thought what you wrote above made no sense.

Then I thought about it. Well, there's no possibility the TCJA would directly cause millions of job losses. But what if TCJA caused the Trump Pandemic? That would explain it! As you know I'm pretty dense. It's taken me months to finally see the light. Could you please tell us exactly how the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017 caused the Trump COVID Pandemic which wiped out millions of jobs?

Just so you'll know I'm not a hypocrite, I did Google "How did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cause the Trump COVID pandemic and destroy millions jobs." But I didn't find much.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807490]I have heard negativity about the USA all the time. I just wish that it were confined to things where we actually did something wrong like in Iran in 1953.
[/QUOTE]I am negative about the USA Govt bcos it does thing wrong, almost weekly. But it seems clear from your reach back in history to 1953, that you do not agree that they do so many things wrong. Your entitled to your opinion on that, but I strongly disagree with it, hence why I am so negative about the USA Govt.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807490]
They already have replacements, and I showed you they were all crap.
[/QUOTE]You uare not comparing like with like, nor is your comparison relevant. You are comparing a curr that is supported by its protected and privileged ptero dollar status, with other currencies that have been affected and often damaged by US policies in the past. In the future world without this petro dollar priviiege, things could be very different. What currencies did in the past does not dictate what they would or could do in a different future world.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807490]
Oh brother. You link an article like that and think you know what you are talking about. Sigh. It was gold backed currencies not gold that were a medium of exchange. The people who are pushing the petrodollar narrative are inevitably pushing gold or cryptocurrency. This is a tired story I have been hearing for decades. [/QUOTE]I gave you one example of an article. Theer are 100's of similar articles about how the petrodollar works. You seem to think its a crypto- / gold-currency conspiracy. Ok, we will see.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807490]

So you do not understand the insurance industry or the role of the USA navy in global trade? If you do not understand those items, then any prediction on where currencies are headed is bound to be wrong.

Why can't you google a story on USA navy and its history on piracy? [/QUOTE]No. I thinkk the difference is I am willing to admit when I don't know about stuff. But regardless, if there is a US hegemony on insurance, it can be overcome as part of the new alternative. International insurance options can and will be.

And you made a claim about piracy. Its not encumbent upon me to provide the research, its your job to support your claim.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2808086]At first read, I figured you just didn't know much about economics. Even Paul Krugman would never argue that tax cuts wipe out millions of jobs or cause Great Depressions or Great Recessions. In fact, he'd undoubtedly say tax cuts have a positive effect on GDP growth and jobs. Admittedly though he's just as partisan as you are and would find some way to criticize any bill passed by Republicans. But anyway initially I thought what you wrote above made no sense.

Then I thought about it. Well, there's no possibility the TCJA would directly cause millions of job losses. But what if TCJA caused the Trump Pandemic? That would explain it! As you know I'm pretty dense. It's taken me months to finally see the light. Could you please tell us exactly how the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017 caused the Trump COVID Pandemic which wiped out millions of jobs?

Just so you'll know I'm not a hypocrite, I did Google "How did the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cause the Trump COVID pandemic and destroy millions jobs." But I didn't find much.[/QUOTE]But that is exactly what Repub tax cuts have done for the past 100 years. If they did the opposite of that I suppose you, Paul Krugman and I would be marveling at the wonderful pattern of Great Repub Recoveries and Expansions and Great Historic Repub Jobs Creation and how terrific it is that we never see a Great Depression, Great Recession or Massive Jobs Destruction after those marvelous Repub Tax Cuts.

But we can't do that, right gentlemen?

Yep, that's right, Paul and Tiny. We can't do that.

Uh, this might help you; Tax cuts to "starve the beast" by paying for them with cuts in services, oversight and enforcing regulations do a pretty good job of starving that beast, the "beast" being the Goose that Lays Golden Eggs of economic expansion and jobs creation under Dem tax codes and economic stewardship, that is.

Trump pulling all those monitors from the Chinese labs 5 months before the first Covid-19 cases emerged in secrecy when a 2-3 months heads up would have prevented Trump's Pandemic was a horrific abdication of economic stewardship by Trump. No doubt because he thought all those permanent tax cuts for corporations and the super wealthy was all he needed to do to create "the best economy ever" and hit his failing golf resorts for the rest of his term.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2808585]I am negative about the USA Govt bcos it does thing wrong, almost weekly. But it seems clear from your reach back in history to 1953, that you do not agree that they do so many things wrong. Your entitled to your opinion on that, but I strongly disagree with it, hence why I am so negative about the USA Govt.
[/QUOTE]You said once that you were from South Africa, isn't that right? You have a lot of nerve criticizing the US for anything. Your country and forefathers couldn't even figure out that institutionalized racism was despicable. It took your breed until the 1990's to figure that out.

The US might have been slow but we figured that out 130 years sooner.

About Julian Assange,

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyekPpdjAaU[/URL]

Or maybe that’s an Australian accent. Hell if I know. I’m an American.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2808643]Uh, this might help you; Tax cuts to "starve the beast" by paying for them with cuts in services, oversight and enforcing regulations do a pretty good job of starving that beast, the "beast" being the Goose that Lays Golden Eggs of economic expansion and jobs creation under Dem tax codes and economic stewardship, that is.[/QUOTE]The Goose that lays golden eggs? Naah! Your earlier description of federal spending is much closer to reality, although the number's way low, and you somehow confused Biden's American Rescue Plan and Inflation Reduction Act with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act:

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2807621]flushed $2. 5+ Trillion in tax payer money down the shitter with nothing to show for it [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2808786]About Julian Assange,

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyekPpdjAaU[/URL]

Or maybe thats an Australian accent. Hell if I know. Im an American.[/QUOTE]Thanks Tiny. I think this docu is good for those folks that have not really paid attention to the case over the past 10 years and need a summary of the case. JA is getting a lot of attention right now bcos its the 4th anniv of his incarceration. He will be released bcos this again is another great example of the USA Govt doing countless things wrong and another reason for me to be negative about it. The reasons the USA Govt put fwd are shallow and / or false and will have horrific consequences for individual freedom. They will not be allowed to do it. JA will eventually be released, even if they got away w punishing the scapegoat more than enough already.

P.S.: apart from one Vennie giel I know, I just never go for white girls, nor redheads, and certainly not ones w Oz accents.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2808875]Thanks Tiny. I think this docu is good for those folks that have not really paid attention to the case over the past 10 years and need a summary of the case. JA is getting a lot of attention right now bcos its the 4th anniv of his incarceration. He will be released bcos this again is another great example of the USA Govt doing countless things wrong and another reason for me to be negative about it. The reasons the USA Govt put fwd are shallow and / or false and will have horrific consequences for individual freedom. They will not be allowed to do it. JA will eventually be released, even if they got away w punishing the scapegoat more than enough already.

P.S.: apart from one Vennie giel I know, I just never go for white girls, nor redheads, and certainly not ones w Oz accents.[/QUOTE]I didn't know most of what was in the video, so it was educational to me. This sounds like a First Amendment (freedom of the press) issue. Assange jumped through hoops to redact documents to protect the innocent and the vulnerable. But Wikileaks efforts were hijacked by the Guardian and Cryptome.

He pissed off The Man and so he will pay for it.

I was being silly about the redhead and the accent. You post a lot of videos where the speakers sound British. The woman is obviously Australian.

I wasn't a red head lover either, but La Diabla in the Colombian telenovela, "Sin Senos no Hay Paraiso" changed that.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2809073]I didn't know most of what was in the video, so it was educational to me. This sounds like a First Amendment (freedom of the press) issue.

I was being silly about the redhead and the accent. You post a lot of videos where the speakers sound British. The woman is obviously Australian.
[/QUOTE]I try to watch a range of news and interest sources, some USA, some UK, some my country, some others. Whatever I find that appears to be legit.

About the Freedom of Press and JA. A moral Q for you. Whay do you think it would be justified for a journalist to speak the truth about the lies of a government, yet not justified for anyone else? Why is that even a relevant Q? Surely, it is a moral virtue for anyone to bring the truth forward about the lies of our ruling elites?

[QUOTE=JustTK;2809255]I try to watch a range of news and interest sources, some USA, some UK, some my country, some others. Whatever I find that appears to be legit.

About the Freedom of Press and JA. A moral Q for you. Whay do you think it would be justified for a journalist to speak the truth about the lies of a government, yet not justified for anyone else? Why is that even a relevant Q? Surely, it is a moral virtue for anyone to bring the truth forward about the lies of our ruling elites?[/QUOTE]My impression is that Assange was a journalist. I haven't thought about this before and don't have a good answer. I don't think it's a huge issue in the USA, as freedom of speech is better protected than most countries. Better than the UK anyway. But yeah, if the CIA or an overly aggressive prosecutor got hold of Assange, they'd probably make mincemeat out of him.

I can imagine instances where it wouldn't be justified for people to leak certain information, for example a list of Afghanis still in Afghanistan who helped the USA Government. As a semi-libertarian, I'm not a fan of government in general, and I don't believe in incarcerating people unless they really deserve it. So effectively if I were dictator of the United States of America, what I'd do about leaks would probably be reasonably similar to what you'd do.

Sorry, I don't have a good answer for this one.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2809406]My impression is that Assange was a journalist. I haven't thought about this before and don't have a good answer.

I can imagine instances where it wouldn't be justified for people to leak certain information,...

[/QUOTE]How about our leaders recognise that there is an important disticntion between the need for ongoing confidentiality, and the act of lying. We can respect confidentiality, but lying needs to be stamped out.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2809528]How about our leaders recognise that there is an important disticntion between the need for ongoing confidentiality, and the act of lying. We can respect confidentiality, but lying needs to be stamped out.[/QUOTE]I definitely don't trust our leaders with determining what's the truth and what's a lie. And I don't entirely trust judges and jurors to do that either. Lying doesn't necessarily deserve legal punishment. But, if in the course of lying people, say, commit fraud, that's another matter.

In the USA, sometimes prosecutors try to put people in jail for lying, even when they commit no other crime. Bill Clinton ("I did not have sex with that woman"), Martha Stewart and Michael Flynn are examples. That just shouldn't happen.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2809255]

About the Freedom of Press and JA. A moral Q for you. [/QUOTE]"There can be no higher law in journalism than to tell the truth and to shame the devil. " - Thomas Jefferson.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2809617]I definitely don't trust our leaders with determining what's the truth and what's a lie. And I don't entirely trust judges and jurors to do that either. Lying doesn't necessarily deserve legal punishment. But, if in the course of lying people, say, commit fraud, that's another matter.

In the USA, sometimes prosecutors try to put people in jail for lying, even when they commit no other crime. Bill Clinton ("I did not have sex with that woman"), Martha Stewart and Michael Flynn are examples. That just shouldn't happen.[/QUOTE]How would one address lying in court if perjury is not available as crime? Disputes can never be resolved without disincentivizing this type of behavior.

Perjury -the offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath

Also:

18 US CODE 1001.

Section 1001's statutory terms are violated if someone:

"falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme or device a material fact.

"makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations.

"makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry".

And, for cases arising after the 1996 amendments, the item at issue was material.

Whether the above acts are criminal depends on whether there is an affirmative response to each of the following questions:

Was the act or statement material?

Was the act within the jurisdiction of a department or agency of the United States? And.

Was the act done knowingly and willfully?

Clinton didn't go to jail or even tried because the quote was at a press conference, and not to officials nor court; was impeached for it.

Martha Stewart. Guilty of four counts of obstruction of justice and lying to investigators; insider trading was dropped. She had her day in court lost, appealed and lost there too.

Flynn pleaded guilty to one felony count of "willfully and knowingly making materially false statements and omissions to the Federal Bureau of Investigation" about conversations with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, ".

Amazing that the truth is seeping out yet the silence is deafening:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XccISIi-yo[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2810923]Amazing that the truth is seeping out yet the silence is deafening:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XccISIi-yo[/URL][/QUOTE]Strange but youtube is not a reliable source, nor are blogs, conspiracy websites or basically any social media source. The truth is one way or another the Chinese government are unlikely to reveal sufficient evidence of their activities to make a definitive conclusion so all the rest is speculation.

[QUOTE=GDreams;2810962]Strange but youtube is not a reliable source. The truth is one way or another the Chinese government are unlikely to reveal sufficient evidence of their activities to make a definitive conclusion so all the rest is speculation.[/QUOTE]Its not YT that one should trust or distrust, it is the content provider. John Campbell has proven to be a remarkable source of info over the past 3 years. Most US state departments (those that have taken the time to look) are now distancing themselves from the animal origin hypothesis, despite trying desperately to prove it for the past 3 years. That in itself is strong evidence. I think the US has enough paperwork and other documenation to conclude the lab leak theory without the need to seek info rom China. Bcos USA was working w China on the virus when it was leaked. USA and China caused the pandemic that killed millions.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811201]Most US state departments (those that have taken the time to look) are now distancing themselves from the animal origin hypothesis, despite trying desperately to prove it for the past 3 years. That in itself is strong evidence. I think the US has enough paperwork and other documenation to conclude the lab leak theory without the need to seek info rom China.[/QUOTE]Uh huh. Common knowledge. In Congress right now.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYmBAWtjoQw[/URL]

Quite incredible what the Dems are doing to free speech in the USA.

It is beconing a crime to hold dissenting views from the govt, those that attend conferences and meetings with opposite political parties will be silenced, jailed, raided, murdered. Lies and blind obsequience are now the norm. Ity sounds like the worst tales our of Communist China and the 50's Soviet Union.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEkpvId1VqQ[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811201]Its not YT that one should trust or distrust, it is the content provider. John Campbell has proven to be a remarkable source of info over the past 3 years. Most US state departments (those that have taken the time to look) are now distancing themselves from the animal origin hypothesis, despite trying desperately to prove it for the past 3 years. That in itself is strong evidence. I think the US has enough paperwork and other documenation to conclude the lab leak theory without the need to seek info rom China. Bcos USA was working w China on the virus when it was leaked. USA and China caused the pandemic that killed millions.[/QUOTE]So if it originated in a bat cave but none of those earliest cases were noted and reported to the responsible countries by the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents so they would have had the easy 2-3 months heads up required to avert Trump's Pandemic and the millions of deaths, millions of jobs and businesses wiped out, worldwide economic and supply-chain collapse, the resulting lingering inflation, etc in the first place because Trump defunded and removed the agents whose very job it was to do exactly that 5+ months before those first cases emerged against all expert warnings for him not to do something so stupid and dangerous, how is that materially different in terms of the historic damage Trump's Pandemic has wrought if it turns out those early cases were instead caused by a lab leak, which would likely have been noted and reported by those agents Trump removed even faster?

Trump's Pandemic resulting from unreported early cases originating from a lab leak Good but originating from unreported early cases originating from a bat cave Bad?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2811329]So if it originated in a bat cave but none of those earliest cases were noted and reported to the responsible countries by the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents so they would have had the easy 2-3 months heads up required to avert Trump's Pandemic ...

Trump's Pandemic resulting from unreported early cases originating from a lab leak Good but originating from unreported early cases originating from a bat cave Bad?[/QUOTE]I didn't say anything about Trump. He is your obsession, not mine. I would say it is much fairer to say this is Fauci's pandemic, not Trump's. USA has been funding GoF research in China for many years prior to Trump. USA and China governments caused these millions of deaths, hence the huge cover up til mow.

What is good and bad. To know the truth is good, to lie is bad. That way we can learn and prevent it from happening again, rather than dooming oursleves to a cycle of identical errors.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811280]Quite incredible what the Dems are doing to free speech in the USA.

It is beconing a crime to hold dissenting views from the govt, those that attend conferences and meetings with opposite political parties will be silenced, jailed, raided, murdered. Lies and blind obsequience are now the norm. Ity sounds like the worst tales our of Communist China and the 50's Soviet Union.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEkpvId1VqQ[/URL][/QUOTE]So when Rhonda Santis appoints a new "board" to place rules on Floriduh's largest employer because the employer publicly disagreed with Rhonda's policies, that's OK? When did Rhonda become a Dem?

Yes, we need to scrutinize and vet the "messengers" That are pushing conspiracies. Cambell, PH Doctor of The coming economic crashes Mortenson, and of course, Kim Iverson, all cashing in on the latest political football. Of course, "common knowledge" is spread from mouth to ear and YouTube clicks. Check out the histories of anyone on their digital soapbox and their "facts" They will move on to the next big controversy, long after Toni Fauci fades from the headlines. Talking heads, explaining to you what really is happening, or merely "asking questions" like the white nationalist jettisoned in the Risk vs Reward, Murdoch calculation.

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2811570]Yes, we need to scrutinize and vet the "messengers" That are pushing conspiracies. Cambell, PH Doctor of The coming economic crashes Mortenson, and of course, Kim Iverson, all cashing in on the latest political football. Of course, "common knowledge" is spread from mouth to ear and YouTube clicks. Check out the histories of anyone on their digital soapbox and their "facts" They will move on to the next big controversy, long after Toni Fauci fades from the headlines. Talking heads, explaining to you what really is happening, or merely "asking questions" like the white nationalist jettisoned in the Risk vs Reward, Murdoch calculation.[/QUOTE]The primary problem is with people jumping from one headline to another. Most of these "headlines" do not affect us individually, and yet, people like to jump onto one side or the other. Youtubers, and other platform producers use these click baits to drive their products. I don't blame them, nor people clicking onto them. Where it becomes a problem is that, once the clicker viewed a video, they somehow become experts on the subject matter. They can't wait to spread the important "info" to everyone they meet. The problem with this of course is that in a couple days or weeks, they become expert in other fields and have forgotten the first episode.

Case Study: Mike Lindell. He bought "information" that he was so sure that he had the credible evidence that he bet $5 M on it, only to be ordered to pay out $5 million dollars by an arbitrator because it was proven otherwise. Lindell is wealthy enough that he can afford this, but it took him down a rabbit hole that may, in the end, wasted years of his life in pursuing this. He could have avoided this, even after he bought the "info", by hiring a computer forensic expert to go throught the data for him. What would that have cost him, $20 K, $100 K? Smaller than $5 M I would guess.

We use the YMMV and RTFF quotes quite a bit on this forum. Do the same on other platforms.

Lindell has taken up permanent residence with Alice. His cubicle is next to that of Robert Kennedy, the lesser, and the Cocaine Bear posing as a legislator, from Notrh Georgia.

[QUOTE=Beijing4987;2811610]Lindell has taken up permanent residence with Alice. His cubicle is next to that of Robert Kennedy, the lesser, and the Cocaine Bear posing as a legislator, from Notrh Georgia.[/QUOTE]My Pillow also sells My Slippers.

Never trust a man who sells bedroom slippers for a living. LOL.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811456]I didn't say anything about Trump. He is your obsession, not mine. I would say it is much fairer to say this is Fauci's pandemic, not Trump's. USA has been funding GoF research in China for many years prior to Trump. USA and China governments caused these millions of deaths, hence the huge cover up til mow.

What is good and bad. To know the truth is good, to lie is bad. That way we can learn and prevent it from happening again, rather than dooming oursleves to a cycle of identical errors.[/QUOTE]Funding the study of coronavirus in order to better combat the spread of it is Good.

Thank you, Dr. Fauci.

Defunding and removing the agents assigned to the job of monitoring and reporting the earliest cases of its spread, against all expert warnings not to do something so stupid and dangerous, whether from a lab leak, a bat cave or a tranny peeing in the toilet stall next to yours and thereby unnecessarily allowing a Pandemic to develop is Bad.

Thank you, Trump.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2811651]Funding the study of coronavirus in order to better combat the spread of it is Good.

Thank you, Dr. Fauci.

Defunding and removing the agents assigned to the job of monitoring and reporting the earliest cases of its spread,

Thank you, Trump.[/QUOTE]Funding the GoF research on COVID then trying to cover up the source by lying about it and supressing debate from public debate, then lying about the efficacy of vaxes and supressing debate on that too. Thank you, Dr. Fauci.

Not sure where his numbers stack up compared to Hitler, Churchill and Stalin now.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811813]Funding the GoF research on COVID then trying to cover up the source by lying about it and supressing debate from public debate, then lying about the efficacy of vaxes and supressing debate on that too. Thank you, Dr. Fauci.

Not sure where his numbers stack up compared to Hitler, Churchill and Stalin now.[/QUOTE]Cute. Lumping Fauci and Churchill with the likes of Hitler and Stalin.

Now we know everything about [I]your numbers[/I].

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2811841]Cute. Lumping Fauci and Churchill with the likes of Hitler and Stalin.

Now we know everything about [I]your numbers[/I].[/QUOTE]Yep, the outright Repubs and pro Repub Bothsider / Neithersider Wingers are desperate to deflect responsibility for allowing, creating and developing Trump's Pandemic from Trump that they have fabricated numbers and made up BS stories about Dr. Fauci in order to do it.

At least Trump's lawyers, close advisors and supporters get indicted, fined, go to jail and suffer reasonable penalties for making dangerous shit up to impress Dear Leader. But creative writers on the internet who do that pretty much get a free pass for it. That's a shame.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2807490]

So you do not understand the insurance industry or the role of the USA navy in global trade? If you do not understand those items, then any prediction on where currencies are headed is bound to be wrong. And your comment on the USA navy just shows me that you are only interested in the bad things the USA does and none of the good.

Why can't you google a story on USA navy and its history on piracy? Afraid you might read something positive on the USA military?[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/guides/these-are-the-worlds-20-largest-insurance-companies-in-2022-421548.aspx[/URL]

6 of the world's largest 20 insurance companies are registered in USA. That is only 30%.

Looking purely at marine insurance – 35% of top 10 companies:

[URL]https://www.fnfresearch.com/blog/top-10-companies-in-marine-insurance-market/348/[/URL]

Besides which, why do you think the loss of the petro-dollar status for the USD would result in these 6 companies refusing to provide international insurance? Seems an unsubstantiated claim to me. US companies operate in a supposedly capitalist market and are free to follow the money. Apart from when the US become the authoritarian bully and instructs companies to block particular sectors (often to their own detriment).

So I see no validity in your insurance comments.

As for your piracy / US Navy claims. I did some quick research and can find nothing to support your claim. It's your claim – you substantiate it. Or I will have to presume this is just nonsense too, just like your understanding of socialism.

Superb show here from Kim Iversen.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-_4v8mamuo[/URL]

First 7 minutes she speaks well about how the mainstream media works, and how it relates to Tucker Carlson. Then she has an excellent chat w RFK. This is the best I have seen from him. But given all that KI has just said, there is zero chance he will even be heard.

This is where we are folks. 2 sides of the same dirty coin. Even RFK admits it.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2812120]Or I will have to presume this is just nonsense too, just like your understanding of socialism.[/QUOTE]Initially, the socialist worker party's political strategy focused on antibig business, anti-bourgeois, and anti-capitalist rhetoric.

That is a quote from wikipedia on the National socialistic German Workers' Party also known as the Nazi party. You will have to distinguish yourself from the Nazi party TK because I really do not see much difference between you and them economically.

Wiki defines, Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

In your world, somehow the USA is fascist and Italy under Mussolini was not. I do not see how this can be but then again you have your own definition of things.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2812120]As for your piracy / US Navy claims. I did some quick research and can find nothing to support your claim. It's your claim you substantiate it.[/QUOTE]From the Halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, we fight our country's battles in the air, on land and sea.

It was not even two years since America had won their independence from Great Britain. It needed trade with southern Europe which unfortunately put American vessels directly in the path of the Barbary pirates. Great Britain, France, etc. Paid surcharges to Tripoli, Algiers, Morocco, and Tunis to allow safe passage for their vessels. America not only did not have the money for that protection, it had no one authorized to provide it. Because we had no navy and nothing to threaten the pirates with, our insurance rate was about 20 times higher than the others.

For Jefferson, this had a personal aspect as well. His beloved wife had died in 1782, and though he had their eldest daughter, 10-year-old Martha with him in Paris, he wanted to bring 6-year-old Polly over but was terrified of a pirate attack. He instructed his brother-in-law to send her only in a British or French vessel, as both nations paid hefty tributes for safety.

That was 250 or so years ago.

Here is today: [URL]https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/counter-piracy/[/URL].

Like I said, you are like Tooms. With him, Republican=bad. With you USA=bad. With him Democrat=good. With you socialism=good. And both of you two stuff whatever facts or narratives there are to fit your belief system.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2813100]
National socialistic German Workers' Party also known as the Nazi party. You will have to distinguish yourself from the Nazi party TK because I really do not see much difference between you and them economically.

Wiki defines, Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation and race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.

In your world, somehow the USA is fascist and Italy under Mussolini was not. I do not see how this can be but then again you have your own definition of things.

Here is today: [URL]https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/counter-piracy/[/URL].

Like I said, you are like Tooms. With him, Republican=bad. With you USA=bad. With him Democrat=good. With you socialism=good. And both of you two stuff whatever facts or narratives there are to fit your belief system.[/QUOTE]Elvis, why are you so vehemently against an ideology when you so clearly know nothing about it?

Why don't you read a little about it, so you can make an informed opinion about it? It would be a hugely more respectful thing to do than to criticize something with total nonsense.

Your comments on the Nazis and their links to socialism are equally ludicrous. Yes, your summary is mostly correct. Nazism is "a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology". Surely that should tell you enough to indicate it has nothing to do with socialism, which is FAR LEFT? Indeed one of the earliest political crimes that the Nazi party did was to purge the country of socialist leaders. It imprisoned and murdered them. It fought and lost an ideological war against a socialist country. It used the word "socialist" in its name to try to make it popular with the working class, but the Nazis were actually a party of the business class – hence right wing. Read more here: [URL]https://www.abc.net.au/religion/nazism-socialism-and-the-falsification-of-history/10214302[/URL].

Yes, Mussolini was also fascist. When did I claim otherwise?

As for your piracy section – that was so naïve it was almost sweet. A short video clip made by and for the promotion of the US Navy. No bias there, right? And the video itself explains that there is only piracy and naval action off the coast of Somalia, not worldwide. And the area is monitored by coalition forces, not just the US Navy. So your totally wrong on every conceivable point, Elvis. The US Navy secures international shipping. Hahaha. OMG Elvis, that was funny.

USA=bad – yes, and I support it with examples. You reply with drivel.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2813165]It used the word "socialist" in its name to try to make it popular with the working class, but the Nazis were actually a party of the business class .[/QUOTE]A great example of names that mean nothing - "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" - the name of a country that has a sole political party.

A succinct explanation of the economic history of Puerto Rico under US imperialist rule.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iju8pBdbmxE[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2813165]Elvis, why are you so vehemently against an ideology when you so clearly know nothing about it?[/QUOTE]LOL. You think I do not know what socialism is? It is when government controls all resources and doles it out as it sees fit.

The hallmarks of capitalism are rule of law, private ownership, small but essential government, regulatory efficiency, and open markets. If you allow these principles to flourish, economic wealth will follow. However, the growth will be uneven. Capitalism facilitates growth but rewards the hardest working and savviest. Socialism strives for equality.

The goal of capitalism is the government as referee, and the problem today is those with money far too often are paying the referee off which is crony capitalism. Slapping ESG scores on business was the equivalent of asking companies: How pro-Democratic party are you? It is this intermingling of corporation and government that bothers me the most. SCOTUS also made a huge mistake with its Citizens United decision allowing corporations more power than individuals in an election.

With socialist nations, they will turn to captialism when they need money. Both Russia and China did this, but the culture is what it is. Both went from rule of law and free elections to dictator for life who can change law at any whim. Venezuela did this with Chavez as well. Once this happens, decline is inevitable. Companies care less about pleasing their customers and more about pleasing their leaders. It can be leftist or right wing. Socialism is whatever the leader wants. It is government control of resources.

Saying Hitler was not socialist is hilarious. He was a dictator and took whatever he wanted and doled out resources as he wished. True, there was more private ownership in Nazi Germany than in Stalin's USSR but the reason for that was for Hitler's financial benefit. Hitler passed laws called enabling laws that made him a dictator. Hugo Chavez copied Hilter on this BTW. Corporations knew who they served.

An interesting question for socialists is if you take away the racism and war mongering, what did the Nazis do that you objected to? The reality is very little.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2813165]As for your piracy section that was so nave it was almost sweet. A short video clip made by and for the promotion of the US Navy. No bias there, right? And the video itself explains that there is only piracy and naval action off the coast of Somalia, not worldwide. And the area is monitored by coalition forces, not just the US Navy. So your totally wrong on every conceivable point, Elvis. The US Navy secures international shipping. Hahaha. OMG Elvis, that was funny.
USA=bad yes, and I support it with examples. You reply with drivel.[/QUOTE]Yeah, I am going to back off on that now. Peter Zeihan mentioned this about the USA navy and global trade. It is true that the USA has the biggest blue ocean navy that can project power anywhere in the world. The second largest air force in the world actually belongs to the USA navy, however the notion that the USA is keeping oceanic trade open seems to be more of an American navy slogan than reality when I dug deeper into it.

However the larger point Zeihan was getting at was that the nature of globalism is on the down swing, and I do agree with that. The USA no longer needs to secure oil from the Persian Gulf. We have plenty of our own now. And blowing up the Russia's Nordstream pipeline was done in part to allow the USA to EXPORT natural gas to Europe. The amount has been in the billions and will soon be in the trillions. Maybe you should start calling it the petroEuro now.

The USA is more interested in being a regional than global player, and money is being shifted away from China to Mexico, Canada, Central America, Canada, and to a lesser degree Colombia and Chile, and you are going to see those nations prosper while China falters.

This guy obviously engages in the same kind of research to arrive at his conclusions as every other Repub and pro Repub Bothsider / Neithersider. He might indeed be 3-4 of the Dem-bashing posters here using different nics:

[URL]https://twitter.com/ricswartzlander/status/1652141805595676674?s=20[/URL]

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2814209]LOL. You think I do not know what socialism is? ...[/QUOTE]Yeah, you don't:

[URL]https://www.thoughtco.com/difference-between-communism-and-socialism-195448[/URL]#text=The%20 main%20 difference%20 is%20 that, by%20 a%20 democratically%2 Delected%20 government.

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2814574]Yeah, you don't:

[URL]https://www.thoughtco.com/difference-between-communism-and-socialism-195448[/URL]#text=The%20 main%20 difference%20 is%20 that, by%20 a%20 democratically%2 Delected%20 government.[/QUOTE]Thanks, JC.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2814209]LOL. You think I do not know what socialism is? It is when government controls all resources and doles it out as it sees fit.

The hallmarks of capitalism are rule of law, private ownership, small but essential government, regulatory efficiency, and open markets. Capitalism facilitates growth but rewards the hardest working and savviest.

With socialist nations, they will turn to captialism when they need money. Both Russia and China did this, but the culture is what it is. Both went from rule of law and free elections to dictator for life who can change law at any whim. Venezuela did this with Chavez as well.

Saying Hitler was not socialist is hilarious. He was a dictator and took whatever he wanted and doled out resources as he wished. An interesting question for socialists is if you take away the racism and war mongering, what did the Nazis do that you objected to? The reality is very little.

Yeah, I am going to back off on that now. Peter Zeihan mentioned this about the USA navy and global trade.[/QUOTE]Firstly, great to hear you have realized there is no hidden treasure in your pirate story.

Now, on to the more interesting and significant matter of your ignorance of socialism. It is very clear from your comments that you have no idea what socialism is. I am not surprised. It is intentional BS propaganda that you have bought in to from your leaders, deliberate misinformation designed so that you will hate the idea of socialism. It has been a deliberate USA policy since the 1940's and 50's.

Have you ever taken the political compass test? Give it a go. It is pretty interesting, and also you will learn smthg - [URL]https://www.politicalcompass.org/test[/URL].

A political position is a combination of 2 positions you have a position on the horiz axis and on the vert axis. Horiz is left / right views, vert axis is authoritarian / libertarian. Hence you will learn that authoritarianism has nothing to do with socialism. A govt can be equally authoritarian or libertarian both to the left and to the right. So your comments about dictatorships and socialism are just garbage. Have you never heard of anarcho-socialism? It's a form of socialism without any government control. Examples of right wing dictatorships : Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Estado Novo, Francoist Spain, various governments in Colombia, Chile, Brazil since WW2.

Socialism is the worker ownership of the means of production. I have told you this before. Likewise you do not understand what capitalism private ownership of the means of production. Size of govt, rule of law, open markets these are irrelevant to what capitalism is. Open markets can function well under socialism. I explained this to you before. "regulatory efficiency" I dunno what this means.

"Capitalism rewards the hardest working and savviest" I could not disagree with any stronger. It most certainly does not. It rewards the wealthy and the most selfish and ruthless. That much is clear from fundamentals. And there are plenty of rewards for hard work under socialism too.

Hitler I answered this in my prev comments. You clearly didn't read what I wrote. Hitler privatized several industries, murdered and incarcerated socialists. Nearly every action he took was UN-socialist. [URL]https://www.abc.net.au/religion/nazism-socialism-and-the-falsification-of-history/10214302[/URL].

Again Elvis, you clearly need to do some research in to what socialism is You have bought in to the US govt propaganda lie that it is some murderous dictatorial plot to remove everyone's freedoms and happiness. And the examples you give are all of authoritarian social democracies (I. E. 'bad' capitalist countries). Try reading this for starters:

[URL]https://www.socialism101.com/basic[/URL]

If you are running for president I don't care what are your other issues if you support making it legal in America and unlocking Americas greatness then I will vote for you.

Who or when is this going to happen?

Traveling for sex outside of America sucks, but America is an amazing country!

[QUOTE=LivingFossil;2814666]If you are running for president I don't care what are your other issues if you support making it legal in America and unlocking Americas greatness then I will vote for you.
Traveling for sex outside of America sucks, but America is an amazing country![/QUOTE]Paid sex is legal in many parts of America. Just head to the south.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2814802]Paid sex is legal in many parts of America. Just head to the south.[/QUOTE]In USA just in one county by Las Vegas?

[QUOTE=LivingFossil;2814831]In USA just in one county by Las Vegas?[/QUOTE]JustTK's probably referring to the Americas, specifically Latin America.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2814609]Have you ever taken the political compass test? Give it a go. It is pretty interesting, and also you will learn smthg - [URL]https://www.politicalcompass.org/test[/URL].[/QUOTE]JustTK, I took the test and fall square in the middle of the bottom right quadrant, meaning socially liberal and economically to the "right". I believe only a few percent of Americans fall in the same quadrant. Most people want government to run other peoples' lives. They're all for picking peoples' pockets and / or legislating what they can do with their bodies. Just as you and I believe the USA government shouldn't dictate to other countries what they can do, so I believe the U.S. government shouldn't dictate to me what I can and can't do, without good reason.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2814609]Socialism is the worker ownership of the means of production. I have told you this before. Likewise you do not understand what capitalism private ownership of the means of production. Size of govt, rule of law, open markets these are irrelevant to what capitalism is. Open markets can function well under socialism. I explained this to you before. "regulatory efficiency" I dunno what this means.

"Capitalism rewards the hardest working and savviest" I could not disagree with any stronger. It most certainly does not. It rewards the wealthy and the most selfish and ruthless. That much is clear from fundamentals. And there are plenty of rewards for hard work under socialism too.[/QUOTE]Can you name a single socialist country in Europe or the Americas that prospered? I can't think of a single one. I can think of a number that are or were basket cases, including.

The Soviet Union

Poland

Czechoslovakia

Hungary

Romania

Bulgaria

Yugoslavia

Venezuela

Cuba

Nicaragua

Bolivia

[QUOTE=JustTK;2814609]Again Elvis, you clearly need to do some research in to what socialism is You have bought in to the US govt propaganda lie that it is some murderous dictatorial plot to remove everyone's freedoms and happiness. And the examples you give are all of authoritarian social democracies (I. E. 'bad' capitalist countries). Try reading this for starters:

[URL]https://www.socialism101.com/basic[/URL][/QUOTE]The section on "the right to food and water" is a hoot. How many people have died of starvation because of "worker ownership of the means of production"? Certainly tens of millions, maybe hundreds. Notable examples include famines in Cambodia (1979), the Ukrainian SSR (1932-1934), North Korea (1995-1999), The Soviet Union (1921-1922), and China (1958-1962). There are examples where collectivization of agriculture turned out badly, in countries that you wouldn't necessarily classify as "socialist. " Mexico and Zimbabwe come to mind.

Just from looking at the changes in the tax tables after the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) I could tell the TCJA made our tax system more progressive -- see Tables 1 and 2, here:

[URL]https://taxfoundation.org/final-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-details-analysis/[/URL]

But Democrats could argue the tax tables alone don't take into account the effects of the Qualified Business Income deduction and some other changes to the tax code implemented by the TCJA, which preferentially benefitted higher income earners.

Well, Justin Haskins figured out a nifty way around this problem. He simply compared the percentage change in average federal income taxes paid by filers in various income groups before (2017) and after (2018) the TCJA. You can see the results in the last column in Table 1, on page 3, here:

[URL]https://heartland.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/Trumps%20Tax%20Cuts%20Policy%20Paper.pdf[/URL]

The results are striking. Tax returns showing income in the range of $1 to $20,000 saw income taxes reduced by 27% to 88%. Those filers making from $20,000 to $100,000 paid 15% to 21% less tax. Taxpayers in the $100,000 to $500,000 brackets paid 11% to 13% less. And those making in excess of $500,000 paid only 3% to 9% less.

So when you hear someone say that the Republican tax cuts just helped the better off and didn't do jack for the workingman, realize he's full of it.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2814845]JustTK's probably referring to the Americas, specifically Latin America.[/QUOTE]Right. He didn't mention USA.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2814848]JustTK, I took the test and fall square in the middle of the bottom right quadrant, meaning socially liberal and economically to the "right". I believe only a few percent of Americans fall in the same quadrant. Most people want government to run other peoples' lives.
[/QUOTE](I am bottom-left quadrant.).

Interesting how you feel about your fellow countrymen. It would be interesting to see some stats on this. My hunch would be that they are right wing and close to centre on liberal-authoritarian axis.

If you are correct, then that would speak volumes about your so-called democracy. Bcos then the government would not be representing the people's interests. How surprising is that! Hehe.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2814848]

Can you name a single socialist country in Europe or the Americas that prospered? I can't think of a single one. I can think of a number that are or were basket cases, including.
[/QUOTE]This wasn't a discussion on the pros / cons of socialism. Rather it is me trying to demonstrate to Elvis that he hasnt a clue what socialism is.

If you want a discussion on pros / cons, we can have it. But first please recheck before we start that you understand the difference between social democracy and democatic socialism.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2814866]This wasn't a discussion on the pros / cons of socialism. Rather it is me trying to demonstrate to Elvis that he hasnt a clue what socialism is.[/QUOTE]Elvis doesn't have a clue about anything, but you did say that "open markets can function well under socialism. ".

Tiny was absolutely right debunking this notion with an unimpeachable fact that economically successful socialist states have never existed in the world history.

Thus, your statement is false. There is no proof that "open markets can function well under socialism. " This has never happened before.

NB. I hope you do realize (unlike Bernie Sanders) that neither Denmark nor Sweden are socialist countries. It's quite sad when an old man calls himself a "democratic socialist" with no clue of what socialism really is.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2814860]Just from looking at the changes in the tax tables after the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) I could tell the TCJA made our tax system more progressive -- see Tables 1 and 2, here:

[URL]https://taxfoundation.org/final-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act-details-analysis/[/URL]

But Democrats could argue the tax tables alone don't take into account the effects of the Qualified Business Income deduction and some other changes to the tax code implemented by the TCJA, which preferentially benefitted higher income earners.

Well, Justin Haskins figured out a nifty way around this problem. He simply compared the percentage change in average federal income taxes paid by filers in various income groups before (2017) and after (2018) the TCJA. You can see the results in the last column in Table 1, on page 3, here:

[URL]https://heartland.org/wp-content/uploads/documents/Trumps%20Tax%20Cuts%20Policy%20Paper.pdf[/URL]

The results are striking. Tax returns showing income in the range of $1 to $20,000 saw income taxes reduced by 27% to 88%. Those filers making from $20,000 to $100,000 paid 15% to 21% less tax. Taxpayers in the $100,000 to $500,000 brackets paid 11% to 13% less. And those making in excess of $500,000 paid only 3% to 9% less.

So when you hear someone say that the Republican tax cuts just helped the better off and didn't do jack for the workingman, realize he's full of it.[/QUOTE]When you hear someone cite the effects of the Republican tax cuts on the lower and middle income margins a year after they were enacted without mentioning what everyone else knew about them, that they were cleverly crafted by the Republicans to sunset after 2-3 election cycles, realize he is full of it.

By the time those tax cuts had evaporated for the lower and middle income margins, Trump and his fellow Repubs had apparently planned to overthrow American democracy enough not to worry about losing anymore elections on the basis that their Jobs Creating and Economy Expansion record of results vs that of the Dems has been atrocious since the late 1920's.

Aside from the most basic characteristic of all Repub "tax / economic policy", it being the wrong thing to do at the wrong time, the doubling of the Estate Tax and Gift Tax giveaway to further the "Dynasty Building For The Wealthy" Repub agenda and the cover it provided before its 2026 sunset for all but Trump Crime Family-type "businesses" to pay for it by cutting resources essential to producing broad and wide-range economic expansion and job growth rather than typical Repub Trickle-Down nothingness, proved it to be just another costly Do Nothing, Know Nothing Repub regressive economic blunder.

[B]BROOKINGS
A fixable mistake: The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Sept. 25, 2019[/B]

[URL]https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2019/09/25/a-fixable-mistake-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/[/URL]

[QUOTE]The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA, P. L. 115-97) was the largest tax overhaul since 1986. Rushed through Congress without adequate hearings and passed by a near-party-line vote, the law is a major legislative blunder badly in need of correction. The overall critique is simple: by providing large, regressive, deficit-financed tax cuts to an economy with low unemployment, rising long-term inequality, and high debt, the law was the wrong thing at the wrong time. It will take resources from future generations and from todays lower- and middle-income households to enrich todays well-to-do. It will take resources away from other badly needed social and economic priorities. The bill was so unpopular with the public that Republican members of Congress like Chris Collins and Lindsey Graham resorted to justifying their support by saying that their donors would cut off funding otherwise.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2814866]This wasn't a discussion on the pros / cons of socialism. Rather it is me trying to demonstrate to Elvis that he hasnt a clue what socialism is.[/QUOTE]This is what you are blathering on about? You take communism and substitute the worker owns things but is managed by the state versus the state owning things (which is meaningless drivel) and toss in freedom of religion and that is the solution to the world's problems? LOL. This is the Venezuelan model.

"We workers are not paid our worth. The value that a worker produces is worth more than the wage he's given. His boss exploits him and his labor for profit. To make money. In the workplace, the worker lives under the dictatorship of his boss. He does not have freedom of speech (he can be fired for saying the "wrong" thing) and there is no democracy; the CEO and the Board of Directors decide everything. The workers are generally not allowed to make decisions for themselves or for the entire company. ".

So the law of supply and demand does not apply to workers? And there is no business where the worker makes money and the owner / manager loses everything? LOL. Are you fucking kidding me? Most businesses fail. This is the stupidest shit I have ever read.

And if you are a third world country like Venezuela, how are you going to attract foreign investment? Are you going to tell companies, "Hey, if you invest here, we are going to steal your business because everything here belongs to the worker. " OMG. Well at least now I know why Venezuela is the way it is. The Venezuelans believed this nonsense.

And you can own land but the worker / government owns all means of production. So if I decide to use my land and grow crops and start a business, then the government / fellow worker owns it? Yeah, that worked real well in the USSR.

Hell, in the USSR, they showed that the people who owned and worked the private lands were only 2% of the lands but grew 30% of the crops. Again, socialists always turn to capitalism when the going gets rough.

If ever there were a country that SHOULD have made it with socialism, it would have been Venezuela with its massive oil reserves and other resources. In truth, the only people who got rich in Venezuela were not the workers but those working for the government and stealing the country blind. It explains the desperation. The people who rose to the top there are not the most productive but the lying, stealing psychopaths.

What is amazing is when you travel and can actually feel the stress and pain of the people. I will never forget going from the USSR to Finland. I was young then but I could literally feel the desperation and unhappiness of the Soviet people and warmth of the Fins. I did not speak either language but I could sense the unhappiness and happiness. I never thought I would feel it again, but I did when I traveled from Venezuela to Colombia.

In contrast, the happiest country I have ever been to was Singapore. I couldn't believe it. Kids were playing outside, smiling, and it reminded me of my growing up in the safe suburbs of my youth. Crime and despair were almost nonexistent then. It was like the show the Wonder Years. I was there at the time of the OJ Simpson verdict and asked the people of Singapore how OJ would have been handled there. I got the same answer from everyone. There would have been no court room show, and the whole thing would have been wrapped up in 3 months.

What really shocked me was the attitude the citizens had with the police. They said, "Yeah, our police would not have screwed up like the American police. " And then there was this comment that caused my jaw to drop, "Our police are fair. " and I heard it over and over again. What other country has citizens who brag about their police? That is what you get when rule of law is clear.

If you took those people and their system and moved it to Venezuela and kicked the Venezuelans out, that country would be the richest on earth. Singapore has nothing resource wise, but they have a system where honesty and hard work pay off versus that of Venezuela where what paid off was subterfuge and lying.

And why is Venezuela such a train wreck? Yeah, it is all the fault of the USA.

We have 3. 4% employment in the USA. Any worker who is not treated well can find his "value" at another company. The very notion that every management team is colluding to keep worker's pay low is hilarious.

This whole socialist thing sounds like the crazy women with golden pussy syndrome who think their pussies are priceless.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2814984]Aside from the most basic characteristic of all Repub "tax / economic policy", it being the wrong thing to do at the wrong time, the doubling of the Estate Tax and Gift Tax giveaway to further the "Dynasty Building For The Wealthy" Repub agenda and the cover it provided before its 2026 sunset for all but Trump Crime Family-type "businesses" to pay for it by cutting resources essential to producing broad and wide-range economic expansion and job growth rather than typical Repub Trickle-Down nothingness, proved it to be just another costly Do Nothing, Know Nothing Repub regressive economic blunder.

[B]BROOKINGS
A fixable mistake: The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Sept. 25, 2019[/B]

[URL]https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2019/09/25/a-fixable-mistake-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/[/URL][/QUOTE]

When I wrote, "so when you hear someone say that the Republican tax cuts just helped the better off and didn't do jack for the workingman, realize he's full of it," I wasn't referring to you or other esteemed board members. Rather I was referring to politicians, the media, and partisan hired guns like William G. Gale, who wrote the Brookings piece.

The gift and estate tax levy is akin to what Nazis did to Jews before World War II, only applied instead to rich people. It entails taking 40% of everything that a person gives away or dies with, in excess of the exemption. Describing the increase in the exemption as a giveaway is baloney. You're justifying theft.

Furthermore you are wrong about the Qualified Business Income deduction. It sunsets on December 31, 2025.

As to your link, Gale is right in one respect. Republicans controlled the presidency, House and Senate in 2017 and 2018, and are reputedly the party of fiscal sanity. IMHO they should have cut spending. Certainly, given that the economy was in good shape, they should have managed to reduce the national debt as a % of GDP. Instead it grew marginally.

That said, the estimated $1.5 trillion cost of the TCJA over a 10 year period was peanuts compared to the $5 trillion+ in additional spending authorized by Democrats when they controlled the presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022. I put cost in quotation marks, because leaving more money in the hands of the people and businesses is not a cost.

When Gale, in his 2019 piece, characterizes the TCJA as regressive, he's full of shit. At that point in time, you could have looked at the tax tables and known that. The marginal rates on people making $200,000 to $424,000 actually went up, from 33% to 35%.


At this point in time we have the benefit of more history, including IRS tax statistics for the year after the cuts took effect. You can pull them here:

[URL]https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-individual-statistical-tables-by-size-of-adjusted-gross-income[/URL]

Haskins (see link in my last post) simply compared 2018 tax paid to 2017 tax paid. If you're handy with Excel you can do the same thing in about 30 minutes. All the effects of the TCJA, not just the changes in the tax brackets, are manifested in the actual amounts of taxes paid. Thus say a wealthy businessman benefits from lower tax rates from the Qualified Business Income deduction. That's incorporated into the tax he paid in 2018. Maybe he owns stock in a company. The dividends are higher and the share price goes up because the corporate income tax was lowered, and, as encouraged by the TCJA, the company repatriated cash from overseas. He collects the dividends and sells the stock and that gain is incorporated in his 2018 income.

I don't see how you can argue with that, and if your man Gale revisited his 2019 piece, he'd have to eat crow.

History has proven Gale wrong in other ways. Here's a 2022 piece from an economist at the Federal Reserve,

[URL]https://www.dallasfed.org/research/papers/2020/wp2001#:~:text=The%20estimates%20imply%20a%20tax,cost%20of%20nearly%20%24158%20billion. [/URL]


The economist, Anil Kumar, estimates the TCJA resulted in 1.5 million more jobs. GDP at the end of 3 years was 1.23 percentage points higher than it would have been otherwise. The loss in tax revenue was 0.8% of GDP. Going past three years, undoubtedly GDP will continue to grow in excess of what it would have if we'd kept the pre-TCJA tax regime in place. Please note that 1.23% increase by 2020 is much higher than the 0.5% increase by 2028 quoted by your man Gale.

Furthermore, your man Gale was wrong about corporate tax revenues. Corporate tax revenues only fell by 2.3% for 2017 to 2018, and 6% for 2018 to 2019. The TCJA, with lower corporate rates, higher tax rates on foreign income, and provisions to encourage repatriation of cash from overseas, encouraged companies to invest in the USA instead of other countries. But it took some time for that to happen, and in 2022 corporate tax revenues were the highest since 2014.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2815196]When I wrote, "so when you hear someone say that the Republican tax cuts just helped the better off and didn't do jack for the workingman, realize he's full of it," I wasn't referring to you or other esteemed board members. Rather I was referring to politicians, the media, and partisan hired guns like William G. Gale, who wrote the Brookings piece.

The gift and estate tax levy is akin to what Nazis did to Jews before World War II, only applied instead to rich people. It entails taking 40% of everything that a person gives away or dies with, in excess of the exemption. Describing the increase in the exemption as a giveaway is baloney. You're justifying theft.

Furthermore you are wrong about the Qualified Business Income deduction. It sunsets on December 31, 2025.

As to your link, Gale is right in one respect. Republicans controlled the presidency, House and Senate in 2017 and 2018, and are reputedly the party of fiscal sanity. IMHO they should have cut spending. Certainly, given that the economy was in good shape, they should have managed to reduce the national debt as a % of GDP. Instead it grew marginally.

That said, the estimated $1.5 trillion cost of the TCJA over a 10 year period was peanuts compared to the $5 trillion+ in additional spending authorized by Democrats when they controlled the presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022. I put cost in quotation marks, because leaving more money in the hands of the people and businesses is not a cost.

When Gale, in his 2019 piece, characterizes the TCJA as regressive, he's full of shit. At that point in time, you could have looked at the tax tables and known that. The marginal rates on people making $200,000 to $424,000 actually went up, from 33% to 35%.


At this point in time we have the benefit of more history, including IRS tax statistics for the year after the cuts took effect. You can pull them here:

[URL]https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-individual-statistical-tables-by-size-of-adjusted-gross-income[/URL]

Haskins (see link in my last post) simply compared 2018 tax paid to 2017 tax paid. If you're handy with Excel you can do the same thing in about 30 minutes. All the effects of the TCJA, not just the changes in the tax brackets, are manifested in the actual amounts of taxes paid. Thus say a wealthy businessman benefits from lower tax rates from the Qualified Business Income deduction. That's incorporated into the tax he paid in 2018. Maybe he owns stock in a company. The dividends are higher and the share price goes up because the corporate income tax was lowered, and, as encouraged by the TCJA, the company repatriated cash from overseas. He collects the dividends and sells the stock and that gain is incorporated in his 2018 income.

I don't see how you can argue with that, and if your man Gale revisited his 2019 piece, he'd have to eat crow.

History has proven Gale wrong in other ways. Here's a 2022 piece from an economist at the Federal Reserve,

[URL]https://www.dallasfed.org/research/papers/2020/wp2001#:~:text=The%20estimates%20imply%20a%20tax,cost%20of%20nearly%20%24158%20billion. [/URL]


The economist, Anil Kumar, estimates the TCJA resulted in 1.5 million more jobs. GDP at the end of 3 years was 1.23 percentage points higher than it would have been otherwise. The loss in tax revenue was 0.8% of GDP. Going past three years, undoubtedly GDP will continue to grow in excess of what it would have if we'd kept the pre-TCJA tax regime in place. Please note that 1.23% increase by 2020 is much higher than the 0.5% increase by 2028 quoted by your man Gale.

Furthermore, your man Gale was wrong about corporate tax revenues. Corporate tax revenues only fell by 2.3% for 2017 to 2018, and 6% for 2018 to 2019. The TCJA, with lower corporate rates, higher tax rates on foreign income, and provisions to encourage repatriation of cash from overseas, encouraged companies to invest in the USA instead of other countries. But it took some time for that to happen, and in 2022 corporate tax revenues were the highest since 2014.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX[/URL][/QUOTE]The estate tax of 10 million wasn't high enough, they needed to raise it, because so many of us are bequeathing 10 million dollars? Seriously? This is who our government prioritizes?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2815196]When I wrote, "so when you hear someone say that the Republican tax cuts just helped the better off and didn't do jack for the workingman, realize he's full of it," I wasn't referring to you or other esteemed board members. Rather I was referring to politicians, the media, and partisan hired guns like William G. Gale, who wrote the Brookings piece.

The gift and estate tax levy is akin to what Nazis did to Jews before World War II, only applied instead to rich people. It entails taking 40% of everything that a person gives away or dies with, in excess of the exemption. Describing the increase in the exemption as a giveaway is baloney. You're justifying theft.

Furthermore you are wrong about the Qualified Business Income deduction. It sunsets on December 31, 2025.

As to your link, Gale is right in one respect. Republicans controlled the presidency, House and Senate in 2017 and 2018, and are reputedly the party of fiscal sanity. IMHO they should have cut spending. Certainly, given that the economy was in good shape, they should have managed to reduce the national debt as a % of GDP. Instead it grew marginally.

That said, the estimated $1.5 trillion cost of the TCJA over a 10 year period was peanuts compared to the $5 trillion+ in additional spending authorized by Democrats when they controlled the presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022. I put cost in quotation marks, because leaving more money in the hands of the people and businesses is not a cost.

When Gale, in his 2019 piece, characterizes the TCJA as regressive, he's full of shit. At that point in time, you could have looked at the tax tables and known that. The marginal rates on people making $200,000 to $424,000 actually went up, from 33% to 35%.


At this point in time we have the benefit of more history, including IRS tax statistics for the year after the cuts took effect. You can pull them here:

[URL]https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-individual-statistical-tables-by-size-of-adjusted-gross-income[/URL]

Haskins (see link in my last post) simply compared 2018 tax paid to 2017 tax paid. If you're handy with Excel you can do the same thing in about 30 minutes. All the effects of the TCJA, not just the changes in the tax brackets, are manifested in the actual amounts of taxes paid. Thus say a wealthy businessman benefits from lower tax rates from the Qualified Business Income deduction. That's incorporated into the tax he paid in 2018. Maybe he owns stock in a company. The dividends are higher and the share price goes up because the corporate income tax was lowered, and, as encouraged by the TCJA, the company repatriated cash from overseas. He collects the dividends and sells the stock and that gain is incorporated in his 2018 income.

I don't see how you can argue with that, and if your man Gale revisited his 2019 piece, he'd have to eat crow.

History has proven Gale wrong in other ways. Here's a 2022 piece from an economist at the Federal Reserve,

[URL]https://www.dallasfed.org/research/papers/2020/wp2001#:~:text=The%20estimates%20imply%20a%20tax,cost%20of%20nearly%20%24158%20billion. [/URL]


The economist, Anil Kumar, estimates the TCJA resulted in 1.5 million more jobs. GDP at the end of 3 years was 1.23 percentage points higher than it would have been otherwise. The loss in tax revenue was 0.8% of GDP. Going past three years, undoubtedly GDP will continue to grow in excess of what it would have if we'd kept the pre-TCJA tax regime in place. Please note that 1.23% increase by 2020 is much higher than the 0.5% increase by 2028 quoted by your man Gale.

Furthermore, your man Gale was wrong about corporate tax revenues. Corporate tax revenues only fell by 2.3% for 2017 to 2018, and 6% for 2018 to 2019. The TCJA, with lower corporate rates, higher tax rates on foreign income, and provisions to encourage repatriation of cash from overseas, encouraged companies to invest in the USA instead of other countries. But it took some time for that to happen, and in 2022 corporate tax revenues were the highest since 2014.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX[/URL][/QUOTE]Where would you have cut spending to pay for the $Trillions+ the Repub TCJA was projected to cost the American taxpayer in exchange for not even a 1 percentage point increase in GDP Growth and a Million fewer jobs with it than without it?

[B]Tax Policy Center[/B]

[URL]https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-did-tcja-affect-federal-budget-outlook[/URL]

[QUOTE]To finance TCJAs tax cuts, the government will issue additional Treasury securities and pay additional debt service. [b]Including that spending, the deficit effects of TCJA are larger. CBOs 2018 update, for example, puts the conventional deficit increase from TCJA at almost $2.3 trillion over its first decade. [/b]The corresponding dynamic score is a $1.9 trillion increase.[/QUOTE]Of course, the Repub Party IS calling for cuts in spending now that their TCJA's pointless debt is a major player in why the debt ceiling must be raised to pay for it.

Guess where?

Had Joe Biden not reacted with speed and brilliance at the SOTU Address, Social Security and Medicare would be front and center today on the Repub list of cut demands. And still might be at some point.

Whatever their demands are, guaranteed they aren't going to hurt Warren Buffett or Elon Musk.

Either way, there is no reason on Earth based on their historical record of behavior and results that the entire point of Repubs jacking up the deficit by $Trillions+ for an economic "stimulus" that accomplished virtually nothing except to produce fewer jobs with it than without it was to use it as another tool to produce deep USA economic decline and, if possible, another Repub worldwide economic disaster.

BTW, I wasn't referring to the Qualified Business Income Deduction when I mentioned Trump Crime Family "style" busines tax breaks that were made permanent. Criminals like the Trumps will always be able to launder income through one corporate shield or another in order to dodge paying taxes.

[QUOTE=Diogenees;2815200]The estate tax of 10 million wasn't high enough, they needed to raise it, because so many of us are bequeathing 10 million dollars? Seriously? This is who our government prioritizes?[/QUOTE]It's theft in my book, the 99.8%, less some people like me, stealing from the 0. 2%.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815241]Where would you have cut spending to pay for the $Trillions+ the Repub TCJA was projected to cost the American taxpayer in exchange for not even a 1 percentage point increase in GDP Growth and a Million fewer jobs with it than without it?[/QUOTE]If I were dictator? I'd cut the military. We already spend more than the next highest 9 countries put together on defense. And move spending and taxation to the states and localities over time. The power of the purse and decisions on how to spend are best made closest to the people, not in Washington D.C. This would entail cuts in education, health, transportation, housing, labor, etc. Cut out most agriculture subsidies and corporate welfare. And with time replace Social Security and Medicare with something like what Singapore has, where individuals use their own accounts funded through payroll contributions to pay for retirement and, say, the first $10,000 of medical expense per year. That would be backed up with a safety net, including medical insurance. You'd keep expenditures at the federal level which make sense. I'd probably fund the NIH and pandemic preparedness expenditure at similar levels as you would if you were dictator, for example. And we do need a military, just a smaller one.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815241][B]Tax Policy Center[/B]

[URL]https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-did-tcja-affect-federal-budget-outlook[/URL][/QUOTE]This left-of-center Tax Policy Center piece must be dated too, like the Brookings piece. They say, "Tax revenues will average just 16.7 percent of GDP from 2020 to 2024, according to CBO's latest projections. That's well below the 17.4 percent of GDP average from 1970 to 2019. " First of all, from an Excel download of the following data, the average federal receipts as a % of GDP from 1970 to 2019 were 17.0%. Federal receipts as a % of GDP in fiscal 2021 and 2022 were 17.4% and 19.2% respectively. Receipts in 2022 were in fact the second highest of any year since 1945, and the fourth highest in American history. And the only tax changes the Democratic government which controlled the presidency and Congress during 2021 and 2022 made didn't take effect until January 1, 2023. So tax revenues under the TCJA tax regime are far outperforming what the CBO predicted.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815241]Either way, there is no reason on Earth based on their historical record of behavior and results that the entire point of Repubs jacking up the deficit by $Trillions+ for an economic "stimulus" that accomplished virtually nothing except to produce fewer jobs .[/QUOTE]Absolutely untrue. Please recall the Federal Reserve piece from 2022 that estimated the TCJA added 1.5 million jobs. Tax cuts create jobs. From Mertens and Ravn's classic paper, "A cut in the APITR (average personal income tax rate) raises employment, lowers the unemployment rate, and increases hours worked per worker. " Which makes sense. When the government's taking less of your paycheck, you're more motivated to work. There's probably some kind of multiplier effect too, where by leaving more money in the hands of the people to spend on consumption you end up growing employment.

[URL]https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1359910/1/aer.103.4.1212.pdf[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815241]BTW, I wasn't referring to the Qualified Business Income Deduction when I mentioned Trump Crime Family "style" busines tax breaks that were made permanent. Criminals like the Trumps will always be able to launder income through one corporate shield or another in order to dodge paying taxes.[/QUOTE]Well, the Trump family owns pass through entities like LLC's and Sub S Corporations. The tax breaks for those expires at the end of 2025. The permanent cuts for for C Corporations, and I don't believe they account for a significant part of the family's worth.

I believe in treating taxpayers equally so would agree with you about the special tax break businesses like Trump's received in the TCJA. Only large companies with either lots of employment expense or lots of depreciation expense received the benefit of the QBI deduction, and Trump's rental real estate businesses qualified. I also agree with you about the corporate shield and dodging taxes. It's nuts that Trump was able to bankrupt his Atlantic City operation, and as a result receive $900 million in carried forward tax losses that he used to shield income in future years. It was his bondholders that lost the money, and yet he still ended up with the tax deduction. There's a good NYT series on this if you're interested.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2815296]If I were dictator? I'd cut the military. We already spend more than the next highest 9 countries put together on defense. And move spending and taxation to the states and localities over time. The power of the purse and decisions on how to spend are best made closest to the people, not in Washington D.C. This would entail cuts in education, health, transportation, housing, labor, etc. Cut out most agriculture subsidies and corporate welfare. And with time replace Social Security and Medicare with something like what Singapore has, where individuals use their own accounts funded through payroll contributions to pay for retirement and, say, the first $10,000 of medical expense per year. That would be backed up with a safety net, including medical insurance. You'd keep expenditures at the federal level which make sense. I'd probably fund the NIH and pandemic preparedness expenditure at similar levels as you would if you were dictator, for example. And we do need a military, just a smaller one.

This left-of-center Tax Policy Center piece must be dated too, like the Brookings piece. They say, "Tax revenues will average just 16.7 percent of GDP from 2020 to 2024, according to CBO's latest projections. That's well below the 17.4 percent of GDP average from 1970 to 2019. " First of all, from an Excel download of the following data, the average federal receipts as a % of GDP from 1970 to 2019 were 17.0%. Federal receipts as a % of GDP in fiscal 2021 and 2022 were 17.4% and 19.2% respectively. Receipts in 2022 were in fact the second highest of any year since 1945, and the fourth highest in American history. And the only tax changes the Democratic government which controlled the presidency and Congress during 2021 and 2022 made didn't take effect until January 1, 2023. So tax revenues under the TCJA tax regime are far outperforming what the CBO predicted.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S[/URL]

Absolutely untrue. Please recall the Federal Reserve piece from 2022 that estimated the TCJA added 1.5 million jobs. Tax cuts create jobs. From Mertens and Ravn's classic paper, "A cut in the APITR (average personal income tax rate) raises employment, lowers the unemployment rate, and increases hours worked per worker. " Which makes sense. When the government's taking less of your paycheck, you're more motivated to work. There's probably some kind of multiplier effect too, where by leaving more money in the hands of the people to spend on consumption you end up growing employment.

[URL]https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1359910/1/aer.103.4.1212.pdf[/URL]

Well, the Trump family owns pass through entities like LLC's and Sub S Corporations. The tax breaks for those expires at the end of 2025. The permanent cuts for for C Corporations, and I don't believe they account for a significant part of the family's worth.

I believe in treating taxpayers equally so would agree with you about the special tax break businesses like Trump's received in the TCJA. Only large companies with either lots of employment expense or lots of depreciation expense received the benefit of the QBI deduction, and Trump's rental real estate businesses qualified. I also agree with you about the corporate shield and dodging taxes. It's nuts that Trump was able to bankrupt his Atlantic City operation, and as a result receive $900 million in carried forward tax losses that he used to shield income in future years. It was his bondholders that lost the money, and yet he still ended up with the tax deduction. There's a good NYT series on this if you're interested.[/QUOTE]Aside from the fact that my point has always been that the $Trillions+ Repub TCJA created FEWER jobs for America with it than without it, proven by your citation of it supposedly creating a paltry 1. 5 million jobs in an uncited or specified number of years vs the number of jobs that were created in that same span of years prior to the passage of it, now that we are down to what would need to be cut in order to pay the extraordinary deficit-ballooning cost of it, do you have any estimation of the millions upon millions of jobs that would be wiped out, what that would do to the economy and for how many years or decades should your dictatorial cuts wish list come true?

You have provided more proof for how and why Repub tax cuts / policy have been and still are disastrous for the USA economy. Maybe Repubs should all move to Singapore and live in Repub Nirvana bliss. Although I'm not sure how another primary goal of Repubs besides wiping out millions of USA jobs, crashing the USA economy and making already wealthy corporations even wealthier, namely to make sure every school child-hating loon is armed with a fully loaded AR-15, will go over with the Singaporeans.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815342]Aside from the fact that my point has always been that the $Trillions+ Repub TCJA created FEWER jobs for America with it than without it, proven by your citation of it supposedly creating a paltry 1. 5 million jobs in an uncited or specified number of years vs the number of jobs that were created in that same span of years prior to the passage of it, now that we are down to what would need to be cut in order to pay the extraordinary deficit-ballooning cost of it, do you have any estimation of the millions upon millions of jobs that would be wiped out, what that would do to the economy and for how many years or decades should your dictatorial cuts wish list come true?

You have provided more proof for how and why Repub tax cuts / policy have been and still are disastrous for the USA economy. Maybe Repubs should all move to Singapore and live in Repub Nirvana bliss. Although I'm not sure how another primary goal of Repubs besides wiping out millions of USA jobs, crashing the USA economy and making already wealthy corporations even wealthier, namely to make sure every school child-hating loon is armed with a fully loaded AR-15, will go over with the Singaporeans.[/QUOTE]OK, I'll repeat the link, for the paper written by the Federal Reserve Board economist in 2022:

[URL]https://www.dallasfed.org/research/papers/2020/wp2001#text=The%20 estimates%20 imply%20 a%20 tax, cost%20 of%20 nearly%20%24158%20 billion.[/URL]

In 2018 alone, the first year after the provisions of the TCJA took effect, 4.2 million jobs were added, and the economist estimates that 1.5 million of those jobs were attributable to the TCJA. The economist estimates that, in 2018, the TCJA resulted in $158 billion lower federal revenues, which equates to $105,000 per job ($158 billion / 1.5 million jobs = 105,000/ job).

I do not believe it's reasonable to say each job "cost" $105,000. Rather, the the federal government left $158 billion more in the private sector during 2018 as a result of the TCJA, and one of the positive effects was the creation of 1.5 million jobs, in 2018 alone.

Originally, the CBO, JCT and others estimated the TCJA would reduce government revenues by around $1.5 trillion over 10 years. (Estimates ran from 1 trillion to 2 trillion according to your link. I'm picking the midpoint.) Again, however, government revenues as a % of GDP were the 2nd highest in 2022 since 1945. And revenues from the corporate income tax in 2022 were much higher than predicted. Thus the reduction may be less than $1.5 trillion.

And, again, the reduction in revenues from the TCJA pales by the side of the additional $5 trillion in unfunded expenditures passed into law by the Democrats in 2021 and 2022. What did we get for those expenditures? Well, inflation kicked off months earlier in 2021 in the USA compared to the rest of the world, as a result of the American Rescue Plan. Inflation in goods and services rose faster than wages, meaning workers real (inflation-adjusted) income dropped. Hundreds of billions will mindlessly be pumped into the pockets of "green energy" entrepreneurs and chip manufacturers who donated to the Democratic Party. And hundreds of billions more will be spent on infrastructure projects in the districts and states of the Congressmen and Senators who voted for the bill. Wouldn't it make more sense if the states and municipalities selected and paid for infrastructure? I can guaran-damn-tee you the money would be spent more efficiently.

Of course, in your view that doesn't matter, because all legislation passed by Democrats is gold and all legislation passed by Republicans is shit. "Democrat good, Republican bad."

My "cut list", accomplished over a period of years (many years for social security and Medicare), would reduce federal government expenditures by a whole lot more than $1.5 trillion. And Californians could still spend just as much money as they want on reparations, green energy, handouts, and everything else under the sun. The problem is that our federal Congressmen, Senators and Presidents want to run everything everywhere. They believe in concentrating as much power as possible in their hands and the hands of the federal bureaucracy. And that's just not as efficient as running and funding government at the state and local level.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2815489]OK, I'll repeat the link, for the paper written by the Federal Reserve Board economist in 2022:

[URL]https://www.dallasfed.org/research/papers/2020/wp2001#text=The%20 estimates%20 imply%20 a%20 tax, cost%20 of%20 nearly%20%24158%20 billion.[/URL]

In 2018 alone, the first year after the provisions of the TCJA took effect, 4.2 million jobs were added, and the economist estimates that 1.5 million of those jobs were attributable to the TCJA. The economist estimates that, in 2018, the TCJA resulted in $158 billion lower federal revenues, which equates to $105,000 per job ($158 billion / 1.5 million jobs = 105,000/ job).

I do not believe it's reasonable to say each job "cost" $105,000. Rather, the the federal government left $158 billion more in the private sector during 2018 as a result of the TCJA, and one of the positive effects was the creation of 1.5 million jobs, in 2018 alone.

Originally, the CBO, JCT and others estimated the TCJA would reduce government revenues by around $1.5 trillion over 10 years. (Estimates ran from 1 trillion to 2 trillion according to your link. I'm picking the midpoint.) Again, however, government revenues as a % of GDP were the 2nd highest in 2022 since 1945. And revenues from the corporate income tax in 2022 were much higher than predicted. Thus the reduction may be less than $1.5 trillion.

And, again, the reduction in revenues from the TCJA pales by the side of the additional $5 trillion in unfunded expenditures passed into law by the Democrats in 2021 and 2022. [b] What did we get for those expenditures? [/b] Well, inflation kicked off months earlier in 2021 in the USA compared to the rest of the world, as a result of the American Rescue Plan. Inflation in goods and services rose faster than wages, meaning workers real (inflation-adjusted) income dropped. Hundreds of billions will mindlessly be pumped into the pockets of "green energy" entrepreneurs and chip manufacturers who donated to the Democratic Party. And hundreds of billions more will be spent on infrastructure projects in the districts and states of the Congressmen and Senators who voted for the bill. Wouldn't it make more sense if the states and municipalities selected and paid for infrastructure? I can guaran-damn-tee you the money would be spent more efficiently.

Of course, in your view that doesn't matter, because all legislation passed by Democrats is gold and all legislation passed by Republicans is shit. "Democrat good, Republican bad."

My "cut list", accomplished over a period of years (many years for social security and Medicare), would reduce federal government expenditures by a whole lot more than $1.5 trillion. And Californians could still spend just as much money as they want on reparations, green energy, handouts, and everything else under the sun. The problem is that our federal Congressmen, Senators and Presidents want to run everything everywhere. They believe in concentrating as much power as possible in their hands and the hands of the federal bureaucracy. And that's just not as efficient as running and funding government at the state and local level.[/QUOTE]You forgot to mention we also got a historic economic recovery for America, I would argue leading the world into a historic recovery from the worst Great Repub Economic, Health and National Security Disaster of all time. Oh, and creating 7 Million jobs so far and still counting by remarkable numbers almost every month, a 50+ year record low unemployment rate, an all time low unemployment rate for African Americans, NO Repub-style Great Recession, etc.

That was probably just a Bothsider / Neithersider oversight since it didn't immediately leap out of your tortured math to come up with something, anything that suggests all those Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions and Great Repub Jobs Destruction are really no different and, hey, might even be better for America than all those Great Dem Recoveries, Great Dem Economic Expansions and Great Dem Jobs Creation.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815581]You forgot to mention we also got a historic economic recovery for America, I would argue leading the world into a historic recovery from the worst Great Repub Economic, Health and National Security Disaster of all time. Oh, and creating 7 Million jobs so far and still counting by remarkable numbers almost every month, a 50+ year record low unemployment rate, an all time low unemployment rate for African Americans, NO Repub-style Great Recession, etc.[/QUOTE]We were essentially at the same unemployment rate pre-COVID, thanks in part to the jobs created by the TCJA. And since a Democratic Senate, House and President didn't see fit to modify any of the provisions of the TCJA, the same tax regime, with its favorable effect on jobs, was in effect when Biden took the reins and we rebounded from COVID.

On the other hand, the labor force participation rate, which declined markedly during the Obama administration, was 63.3% pre-COVID, and currently has only rebounded to 62.6%. A lot of people have stopped looking for work.

The majority of analysts are predicting a recession. When that happens, the unemployment rate will go up. Your post, above, will not age well.

Interesting inititaive taken by California here:
[URL]https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/08/us/california-reparations-task-force/index.html[/URL]

If it goes ahead, it would set a precedent for other states.

Caricom (an organisation of Caribbean nations) is also pressing Europe for reparations:
[URL]https://caricom.org/caricom-ten-point-plan-for-reparatory-justice/[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2815768]Interesting inititaive taken by California here:
[URL]https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/08/us/california-reparations-task-force/index.html[/URL]

If it goes ahead, it would set a precedent for other states.

Caricom (an organisation of Caribbean nations) is also pressing Europe for reparations:
[URL]https://caricom.org/caricom-ten-point-plan-for-reparatory-justice/[/URL][/QUOTE]And I want reparations too. My family came here and built the steel mills over an hundred years ago. They were severely discriminated against by WASPs. But worked their asses off only to later lose everything to reverse discrimination. Where's our reparations? You must be nuts or related to those who are crying. Sorry but I've been through reverse discrimination for too many years so I resent this stupid act that I'll pay for. Will you contribute? Nothing like buying votes with our money. You need to spend some time in an inner city and see how free money gets wasted. Oh yes, I forgot you're the guy who said working out has no health benefit. ,it's only for vanity. Reparations have no benefit except to those who do nothing to deserve another handout.

Trump is a fool in so many ways but those who want to give out reparations are bigger fools and I will jump to the other side if this becomes the norm!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2815748]We were essentially at the same unemployment rate pre-COVID, thanks in part to the jobs created by the TCJA. And since a Democratic Senate, House and President didn't see fit to modify any of the provisions of the TCJA, the same tax regime, with its favorable effect on jobs, was in effect when Biden took the reins and we rebounded from COVID.

On the other hand, the labor force participation rate, which declined markedly during the Obama administration, was 63.3% pre-COVID, and currently has only rebounded to 62.6%. A lot of people have stopped looking for work.

The majority of analysts are predicting a recession. When that happens, the unemployment rate will go up. Your post, above, will not age well.[/QUOTE]The unemployment rate had been in a steady downward trajectory after Bush's Great Repub Recession skyrocketed it starting soon after Obama and the Dems passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009. It was clearly zooming downward to below 4% LONG before the TCJA was passed. Neither the TCJA nor anything else proposed, fought for and passed by Repubs had anything whatsoever to do with getting the unemployment rate there.

See attached BLS line chart covering 2007 to 2018 below and please explain how the TCJA got the unemployment rate to "essentially at the same" level it is today, below 4%:

[URL]https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000[/URL]

Also, so now you are saying the inevitable but transitory Trump's Pandemic Crash rebound-related inflation was the fault of Trump and his Repubs for passing the TCJA, which you are now crediting with that rebound? I thought it was evil Joe Biden and his evil Dems who caused that inflation by putting too much money into Americans' pockets and all that. Which flies in the face of what happened when, according to you, Americans had more money put into their pockets by those fabulous Repub tax cuts.

Wow. Those were some miraculous Repub tax cuts; Good and Non Inflationary whenever they do whatever it is you want to give them credit for doing. Quite the opposite of how you characterize that same result with Dem policies. LOL.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I have been reading and hearing warnings from economic experts and gurus about that "Great Biden / Dem Recession, Massive Job Losses and Skyrocketing Unemployment Rate" coming any minute now for, what, 2 1/2 years now. I heard the same thing about the Great Clinton / Dem Recession and the Great Obama / Dem Recession for a full 8 years each.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815795]The unemployment rate had been in a steady downward trajectory after Bush's Great Repub Recession skyrocketed it starting soon after Obama and the Dems passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009. It was clearly zooming downward to below 4% LONG before the TCJA was passed. Neither the TCJA nor anything else proposed, fought for and passed by Repubs had anything whatsoever to do with getting the unemployment rate there.

See attached BLS line chart covering 2007 to 2018 below and please explain how the TCJA got the unemployment rate to "essentially at the same" level it is today, below 4%:

[URL]https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000[/URL]

Also, so now you are saying the inevitable but transitory Trump's Pandemic Crash rebound-related inflation was the fault of Trump and his Repubs for passing the TCJA, which you are now crediting with that rebound? I thought it was evil Joe Biden and his evil Dems who caused that inflation by putting too much money into Americans' pockets and all that. Which flies in the face of what happened when, according to you, Americans had more money put into their pockets by those fabulous Repub tax cuts.

Wow. Those were some miraculous Repub tax cuts; Good and Non Inflationary whenever they do whatever it is you want to give them credit for doing. Quite the opposite of how you characterize that same result with Dem policies. LOL.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I have been reading and hearing warnings from economic experts and gurus about that "Great Biden / Dem Recession, Massive Job Losses and Skyrocketing Unemployment Rate" coming any minute now for, what, 2 1/2 years now. I heard the same thing about the Great Clinton / Dem Recession and the Great Obama / Dem Recession for a full 8 years each.[/QUOTE]Biden and the Democrats will have very little to do with your so called "Great Biden / Dem Recession. " I'll blame it mostly on the business cycle and higher interest rates. If the Fed had started raising interest rates when Biden's inflationary American Rescue Plan was passed in 2021, we probably would have been looking at a softer landing. But I blame that more on the Fed than Democrats. Democrats are always going to spend, spend, spend. And the Republicans are almost as bad. The Fed should have been the adult in the room.

A slowdown in bank lending and problems with commercial real estate loans may be contributing factors as well. I would credit Yellen, Gruenberg and Powell for doing what they could to prevent deposit runs and bank failures this year. And say they could have done more if not for political opposition to "bailing out" uninsured depositors. And that political opposition is coming more from the Republican side of the aisle.

I'm going to take the word of the Fed economist over your trend following expertise. And he says 1. 5 million jobs were added by the TCJA, just in 2018.

If you assume those 1. 5 million people would be unemployed if not for the TCJA, then, given that the total labor force is around 155 million, unemployment is around one percentage point lower than it would be otherwise. That would mean the unemployment rate without the TCJA would be 4. 5%, not counting jobs created after 2018 that wouldn't be there without the TCJA.

I am not as you say crediting the TCJA with the rebound after pandemic. The TCJA only cut federal government revenues by 0.8% of GDP. If I were dictator, I'd cut federal government revenues by more. And federal spending by a whole lot more. Over a period of years.

And the pandemic crash would have occurred no matter who was president.

Trump doesn't want his Repub Party and the country to wait until his Fed Chairman appointee gets around to blundering us into another Great Repub Recession / Depression and Massive Jobs Destruction. No, he wants his Repub Party to produce another one by June 1 if not sooner!

[B]Trump urges GOP to let U.S. default on debt if Dems don't accept spending cuts[/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/11/trump-endorses-debt-ceiling-default.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815795]Also, so now you are saying the inevitable but transitory Trump's Pandemic Crash rebound-related inflation was the fault of Trump and his Repubs for passing the TCJA, which you are now crediting with that rebound? I thought it was evil Joe Biden and his evil Dems who caused that inflation by putting too much money into Americans' pockets and all that. Which flies in the face of what happened when, according to you, Americans had more money put into their pockets by those fabulous Repub tax cuts.[/QUOTE]OK, let's look at inflation. At the end of February, 2021, YoY CPI inflation was running 1.7% per year. The Democrats' $1. 9 trillion American rescue plan (ARP) was passed in March, 2021, and the government mailed out $1400 checks to most Americans that month. This was despite the fact that the economy was already humming. The annualized quarterly change in GDP was 35.3% in 3Q 2020, 3.9% in 4Q 2020, and 6.3% in 1Q 2021. Larry Summers noted that COVID had reduced wages by about $250 to $300 billion over the course of 2020. Trump and Pelosi pushed through $900 billion of stimulus in December, 2020 -- the amount would have been much higher if not for the restraining influence of Republican Senators. Then Biden and a Democratic Congress follow up with $1.9 trillion more three months later (the ARP), without a single Republican vote. That was 9% of GDP! So you have 0.9 trillion + 1.9 trillion = 2. 8 trillion in stimulus to bridge a $250 billion to $300 billion gap in reduced wages. That resulted in a savings overhang (savings in excess of what it would have been without the stimulus) of about $2.5 trillion. That is, $2.5 trillion more in cash, chasing goods and services when consumers decided to spend the money.

That's a great recipe for inflation, and that's what happened. At the end of February, 2021, YoY inflation was running 1.7%. The ARP checks again went out in March of 2021. April inflation was 4.2%, and May was 5.0%. Inflation in Europe for the same two months was 1.6% and 2% respectively.

So, again, Biden et al's 1.9 trillion stimulus represented about 9% of GDP, pumped into the economy at the worst possible time.

How much extra money was left in the hands of the people and businesses as a result of the TCJA during the year after the ARP was passed? Well, based on earlier estimates, about 160 billion, or about 0.8% of GDP. It might have been a lot less. Government revenues were 17.4% of GDP in the year ended September 30,2021, and 19.2% of GDP in the year ended September 30,2022. Those numbers are above the long term average (1970 to 2019) of 17%. So maybe the "stimulus" provided by the TCJA in the year after the ARP was passed was considerably less than 0 8%.

But yeah, if it makes you feel secure in the superiority of Democratic Politicians, and you some how identify with that, go on believing that it was the TCJA that kicked off inflation.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2815878]Trump doesn't want his Repub Party and the country to wait until his Fed Chairman appointee gets around to blundering us into another Great Repub Recession / Depression and Massive Jobs Destruction. No, he wants his Repub Party to produce another one by June 1 if not sooner!

[B]Trump urges GOP to let U.S. default on debt if Dems don't accept spending cuts[/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/11/trump-endorses-debt-ceiling-default.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL][/QUOTE]If there is a default, it's because Biden and Yellen and others want a default for political purposes. All they have to do is maintain interest payments on the debt and cut other government expenditures, and there will be no default.

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2815791]And I want reparations too. My family came here and built the steel mills over an hundred years ago. They were severely discriminated against by WASPs. You must be nuts or related to those who are crying. Will you contribute? Reparations have no benefit except to those who do nothing to deserve another handout.[/QUOTE]If you read my comment again you will note that I didn't express an opinion. And I am not from USA or Europe so I won't be asked to pay anything.

I am not familiar with your fmily story nor what a WASP is. So I am not position to comment on that. BUt what makes you say "Reparations have no benefit except to those who do nothing to deserve another handout. " IS there a historical record to support your claim?

Let's say I qualify for a payment. I use the money to start a small business that provide for me and my family. This means that I would not qualify for or deserve another benefit, yet the reparation have provided benefit. So surely this is an example which contradicts your statement?

Fascinating idea put forward here. I am not sure I have ever heard it myself. Its about how capitalism (remember, the freedom ideology) requires closed borders in order to function well.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXrWtRZofmE&t=823s[/URL]

Watch it until 20 min mark. You can apply this to USA too, although its a UK news show.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2816091]If there is a default, it's because Biden and Yellen and others want a default for political purposes. All they have to do is maintain interest payments on the debt and cut other government expenditures, and there will be no default.[/QUOTE]So just "pay the interest" and "cut other government expenditures"?

How about we demonstrate to the world that we are not all Deadbeat Repubs here who can't be trusted to pay the bills Trump and Deadbeat Repubs racked up to the tune of 25% of all the debt the USA had racked up since the beginning without any bullshit hostage-taking and still damaging brinkmanship that might again result in Deadbeat Repubs lowering our credit rating?

You know, the way Deadbeat Repubs did at least 3 times under Trump when he and they added $Trillions to the debt / deficit with practically nothing of value to show for it even before Trump laid the groundwork for, created and developed Trump's Pandemic.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2816121]If you read my comment again you will note that I didn't express an opinion. And I am not from USA or Europe so I won't be asked to pay anything.

I am not familiar with your fmily story nor what a WASP is. So I am not position to comment on that. BUt what makes you say "Reparations have no benefit except to those who do nothing to deserve another handout. " IS there a historical record to support your claim?

Let's say I qualify for a payment. I use the money to start a small business that provide for me and my family. This means that I would not qualify for or deserve another benefit, yet the reparation have provided benefit. So surely this is an example which contradicts your statement?[/QUOTE]Start a business with your own money not some undeserved handout. I agree with you on many things but since you are not from USA you really can't know or promote such a thing. I think maybe you are from South Africa and even though there was minority white rule and segregation, it's a totally different history and situation. I wish slavered never took place but it was the Dutch who did most. WASP is white Anglo Saxon Protestant. I did study some about Mandela just a few years ago and he was a most incredible man. We all should be more like him. When I was young, Imwas a carpenter apprentice during the 70's. Jobs were impossible to get. But the city I lived in received a lot of federal money. There was a black mayor and his policy was that all jobs had to be manned by minorities! No whites! I lived in that shit hole city but couldn't work there! That's when I learned about reverse racism and changed my mind about the whole poor black men.

You can't understand but it's a real sore spot with me. Unless you have lived in a neighborhood or city that changed racially you can't relate. No personal attack on you.

[B]Republicans Finally Admit They Have No Incriminating Evidence on Joe Biden.
A 65-page report, a press conference, and nothing to show for it.
May 11, 2023[/B]

[URL]https://newrepublic.com/post/172627/republicans-admit-no-incriminating-evidence-joe-biden[/URL]

[QUOTE]Republicans big investigation into the Biden family has revealed not a lot.

The House GOP accused Joe Biden and his family on Wednesday of engaging in business with foreign entitiesbut were unable to provide any actual evidence linking the president to any wrongdoing.

House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer released a 65-page memo detailing a sprawling investigation into Biden and some of his relatives, particularly his son Hunter Biden. Nowhere in the massive document was there a specific allegation of a crime committed by Biden or any of his relatives.

During a press conference explaining the investigation, Comer was asked if he had evidence directly linking Biden to corruption. The Kentucky Republican hemmed and hawed but ultimately admitted he didnt.

The memo accuses the Biden family of involvement in a scheme to peddle influence in Romania from 2015 to 2017, as well as financial dealings with individuals in China. Hunter Bidens name comes up repeatedly. But the memo contains scant details of all of these alleged dealings, nor does it contain any evidence that any laws were broken or that Biden was involved in his sons Chinese business.[/QUOTE]Never fear, admitted Repubs and pro Repub Bothsiders / Neithersiders, this nothingess on Biden will still be a centerpiece of the Know Nothing, Do Nothing Repub campaign against him in 2024.

And, never fear, pro Repub Mainstream Media will be right there for them every step of the way to suggest there might still be kinda sorta maybe something kinda sorta maybe there for America to consider in their vote instead of, you know, the irrefutable historic data and record of results showing their beloved Repubs to be absolutely atrocious at handling the USA economy, national security, protecting and defending the Constitution and American democracy.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2816163]Fascinating idea put forward here. I am not sure I have ever heard it myself. Its about how capitalism (remember, the freedom ideology) requires closed borders in order to function well.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXrWtRZofmE&t=823s[/URL]

Watch it until 20 min mark. You can apply this to USA too, although its a UK news show.[/QUOTE]No, the guy on the left, Michael Walker, is right. Capitalism is all for more open borders. Walker correctly states that the Economist, the flagship publication of British liberal capitalism, encourages immigration. So do USA Corporations, which are always trying to get the government to issue more H1 B immigrant visas. I believe you define socialism as a system where workers control the businesses. Well then, it's the socialists and the labor unions which historically have been the biggest critics of immigration in the USA and the UK. They don't want competition for jobs. They'd rather the poor Mexican or African stay home and starve to death. And yes, more recently the populist right, represented by leaders like Nigel Farage and Donald Trump, is very anti immigrant.

The most capitalist countries in the world, Singapore and Hong Kong, are the easiest to visit. Practically no one needs a visa. And socialist or formerly socialist countries like Russia, China and Vietnam are among the hardest. I had to jump through hoops to get visas to go there anyway.

I’m an anarcho Libertarian capitalist, and my personal view is that the USA should allow anyone to immigrate who believes in Capitalism and who would vote for Republicans.

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2816193][b]Reparations[/b][/QUOTE]I'm with you ChuchoLoco. San Francisco is considering $5,000,000 payments to every eligible black adult, the elimination of personal debt and tax burdens, guaranteed annual incomes of at least $97,000 for 250 years, and homes for $1.00 a family, among other recommendations from the city-appointed reparations committee.

[URL]https://apnews.com/article/san-francisco-black-reparations-5-million-36899f7974c751950a8ce0e444f86189[/URL]

The state of California's reparations task force has approved recommendations which could give black residents $1.2 million each as compensation for slavery.

[URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12055465/California-panel-approves-reparations-proposal-life-long-black-residents-1-2million.html[/URL]

I don't get it. The people who deserve reparations are dead. Black, white, brown and yellow Americans are all better off than most people in the world. There are a lot of Nigerians, Ukrainians, Venezuelans and Chinese who would give their right nuts to go to America.

Yes, Black Americans on average don't receive as good of education or health care. And we should do more to alleviate that. But these multimillion dollar per person reparations are nuts. As I understand it, there never was much slavery in California, and it was outlawed in the 1840's, almost 200 years ago.

BUT, if Californians want to do that, I think they should have at it. As long as it doesn't affect my taxes I don't really care.

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2816193]but since you are not from USA you really can't know or promote such a thing. That's when I learned about reverse racism and changed my mind about the whole poor black men.
Unless you have lived in a neighborhood or city that changed racially you can't relate.[/QUOTE]Firstly, I have lived in 2 countries where I was prejudiced against by the government bcos of my colour / origins. Not that it matters. One of those countries was where I heard this refrain as an excuse so often it was sickening "you were not from here, so how would you know, so shut up" - this is the most feeble excuse bcos I found that actually the most ignorant people were the ones that were living there at that time bcos they were subjected to the strongest propaganda by thier governments. They only heard one side (the false side) of the arguments.

I believe all forms of discrimination are abhorrent. That is why I am all for open borders. An end to nation states.

I don't have my mind set firmly yet on what the best way forward should be. At this point, I think some form of reparation is due. Simply bcos it has never been settled. BUt that could be in the form investment in prev disadvantaged regions, natuonal housing projects, citizenship opportunities (for the CARICOM nations). But before all this, we must put an end to continued discrimation that exists, otherwsie the 'debt' simply gets bigger.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2816395]Firstly, I have lived in 2 countries where I was prejudiced against by the government bcos of my colour / origins. Not that it matters. One of those countries was where I heard this refrain as an excuse so often it was sickening "you were not from here, so how would you know, so shut up" - this is the most feeble excuse bcos I found that actually the most ignorant people were the ones that were living there at that time bcos they were subjected to the strongest propaganda by thier governments. They only heard one side (the false side) of the arguments.

I believe all forms of discrimination are abhorrent. That is why I am all for open borders. An end to nation states.

I don't have my mind set firmly yet on what the best way forward should be. At this point, I think some form of reparation is due. Simply bcos it has never been settled. BUt that could be in the form investment in prev disadvantaged regions, natuonal housing projects, citizenship opportunities (for the CARICOM nations). But before all this, we must put an end to continued discrimation that exists, otherwsie the 'debt' simply gets bigger.[/QUOTE]TK,

I haven't walked in your shoes and you haven't walked in mine.

CL.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2816390]I'm with you ChuchoLoco. San Francisco is considering $5,000,000 payments to every eligible black adult, the elimination of personal debt and tax burdens, guaranteed annual incomes of at least $97,000 for 250 years, and homes for $1.00 a family, among other recommendations from the city-appointed reparations committee.

[URL]https://apnews.com/article/san-francisco-black-reparations-5-million-36899f7974c751950a8ce0e444f86189[/URL]

The state of California's reparations task force has approved recommendations which could give black residents $1.2 million each as compensation for slavery.

Tiny,

Which one of the recipients was a slave? Thats just insane! The problem is that if California does it then they will want it in all states. Most wont be so stupid to do so, at least I hope not. The grocery store and the local Target cose to my house have a mixed clientele. This is because the grocery stores and others in minority areas here have closed for reasons that I wont go into here. But what I have noticed is that the shopping carts are full and the cars and SUVs the minority clients drive are for the most part, much nicer than mine. Im talking Audi, Lexus, Mercedes and late model US cars. I drive a Honda 2019 HRV so its decent and really what I can afford and all that I need. But I am really amazed every time Im in the parking lots.

I agree with what you have said too. Sometimes I wish that I was younger but the way things are going, maybe Im better off being a class of 69.Another couple years and Ill have to settle for the old gals. What a horrible thought! Hahaha. Get it while you can. Just say No to reparations should be a new motto.

[URL]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12055465/California-panel-approves-reparations-proposal-life-long-black-residents-1-2million.html[/URL]

I don't get it. The people who deserve reparations are dead. Black, white, brown and yellow Americans are all better off than most people in the world. There are a lot of Nigerians, Ukrainians, Venezuelans and Chinese who would give their right nuts to go to America.

Yes, Black Americans on average don't receive as good of education or health care. And we should do more to alleviate that. But these multimillion dollar per person reparations are nuts. As I understand it, there never was much slavery in California, and it was outlawed in the 1840's, almost 200 years ago.

BUT, if Californians want to do that, I think they should have at it. As long as it doesn't affect my taxes I don't really care.[/QUOTE]Tiny, my turn to agree with you and all that you said.

The local grocery store and Target have a mixed clientele but more minorities the last couple years because all the stores in their neighborhoods have closed for reasons you can imagine. Their shopping cars are full and many pay with those welfare cards or whatever they use now but you should see the cars they drive. All new luxury foreign cars or SUVs. All better than my Honda HRV bare bones model. If California does it, everyone in every state will want and cry for it. Man, I used to want to be young but the way this is going, better to be from the class of '69 as I am.

The nice thing about Medellin for me until the last couple years was getting away from things.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2816395]I don't have my mind set firmly yet on what the best way forward should be. At this point, I think some form of reparation is due. Simply bcos it has never been settled. BUt that could be in the form investment in prev disadvantaged regions, natuonal housing projects, citizenship opportunities (for the CARICOM nations). But before all this, we must put an end to continued discrimation that exists, otherwsie the 'debt' simply gets bigger.[/QUOTE]JustTK, This actually is quite reasonable IMHO, if you're talking about countries like Jamaica, Dominica and Haiti that truly are poor. From having seen a couple of museums in Caribbean countries, yes, peoples' ancestors were subjected to incredible hardship by Europeans, who should have left their former colonies in better shape.

Where ChuchoLoco and I are having a problem is when this is extended to the USA. Or in my mind to other prosperous places like the Bahamas, Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands. Many of us aren't as well off as the people we'd be paying reparations to.

This is a must watch for half the participants here:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX74Hij3aMM[/URL]

And its funny as FK for the rest.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2816778]This is a must watch for half the participants here:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX74Hij3aMM[/URL]

And its funny as FK for the rest.[/QUOTE]Yes, Jimmy Dore is funny as fuck if you find unmitigated ill-informed BS to be funny.

"After 8 years of Obama Americans' lives were worse" or some such BS "and that's why they voted for Trump and not Hillary.

Uh. Hillary got 3 million more votes than Trump. Yep, the first woman nominee for a major political party, one who had been lied about and demonized by the opposition for the previous 30+ years got 3 million more votes than Donald Trump.

And that was because Americans' lives were no better in 2016 after 7 years of steady, straight line declines in the Unemployment Rate, a record number of consecutive months of job gains and NO Great Recession vs the USA economy Crashing down around our ears at a historic level into millions upon millions of job losses and the Greatest Repub Recession in late 2008/ early 2009 since the Great Repub Depression of the late 1920's / early 1930's.

Way to rewrite history, Jimmy. LOL.

That is, according to idiot Jimmy Dore and, presumably, some lamebrain drunks they asked at local bars. LOL.

So that other brain dead idiot, Dr. Phil, pointed out that Dems and Repubs each held control of the government for about 50% of the time over the past few decades and, oh look, nothing has changed or improved. Uh-huh. Except he neglected to mention that the 50% of the time Repubs were in control we were plunged into the worst economic downturns of all time, Trump's term being just the latest example, vs the 50% of the time when Dems were in control we enjoyed the Greatest Recoveries, Expansions and Job Gains of all time, Biden's term being the latest example of that.

I really couldn't stomach any more than that and it was only the first 5-6 minutes of that astonishing BS fest.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2816956]

"After 8 years of Obama Americans' lives were worse" or some such BS "and that's why they voted for Trump and not Hillary.

Uh. Hillary got 3 million more votes than Trump. Yep, trs got 3 million more votes than Donald Trump.
[/QUOTE]I couldn't have scripted it any better.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2816199][B]Republicans Finally Admit They Have No Incriminating Evidence on Joe Biden.
A 65-page report, a press conference, and nothing to show for it.
May 11, 2023[/B][/QUOTE]Silly Republicans. If you're going to try to lock up Tony Soprano, do you go after Meadow and A. J. Soprano? Would you go after the kids of mob bosses? Of course not. You go after the capos and the lieutenants. The made men. In Biden's case, that's people like Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries and Merrick Garland. We're not literally talking "family" here.

The silly Republicans are hyper-focused on a tree and totally missing the forest. Yes, the Biden Family Criminal Syndicate is much, much bigger than the actual Biden family. The sums of money we're talking about are 100,000X greater than the measly amount Hunter received for attempted influence peddling.

Last week on Morning Joe (MSNBC), Steve Rattner, one of the enablers of the Syndicate, approvingly said Biden planned to steal an additional $5.5 trillion from American citizens and businesses over the next 10 years through higher taxes.

Now the EPA is planning to require natural gas and coal fired power plants to eliminate nearly all their carbon dioxide emissions in just a little over a decade. That may involve stealing another trillion from shareholders in the utility companies and the gas and coal companies who will end up with stranded assets. Or from consumers who will pay much higher prices for electricity when the utilities pass through the cost of carbon sequestration to them.

Then there are the new proposed rules from the EPA, that will ensure 67% of new passenger cars and 25% of heavy trucks sold in the USA are all-electric by 2032. That's going to cost a bundle.

And how about Biden's attempt to shut down oil and gas drilling on federal lands and federal offshore leases? If he'd been successful in that, he would have stranded hundreds of billions in assets.

And as a part of this enterprise in theft, Joe Biden, the Godfather (aka "the Don", aka "The Big Guy") and other Democratic Politicians will hand out a ton of money to their contributors, green energy entrepreneurs and the like. They got a good start with the ridiculously-named "Inflation Reduction Act." A Wall Street Journal editorial estimates the green handouts and subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act will cost over $1 trillion.

I'm sure there are other examples. I know a bit about taxes and energy so am familiar with the ones described above. However, just as the mafia engages in many endeavors, like extortion, drugs, gambling, and theft, so too the Democratic Party crime syndicate must be stealing in other ways than just through taxation and energy.

This is not a slam on you and other esteemed board members who are Democratic Party sympathizers. You are simply mistaken, just like the innocents in Sinaloa who idolized El Chapo or the people in Medellin who loved Pablo Escobar. Hopefully with time you will learn.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817032]Silly Republicans. If you're going to try to lock up Tony Soprano, do you go after Meadow and A. J. Soprano? Would you go after the kids of mob bosses? Of course not. You go after the capos and the lieutenants. The made men. In Biden's case, that's people like Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries and Merrick Garland. We're not literally talking "family" here.

The silly Republicans are hyper-focused on a tree and totally missing the forest. Yes, the Biden Family Criminal Syndicate is much, much bigger than the actual Biden family. The sums of money we're talking about are 100,000X greater than the measly amount Hunter received for attempted influence peddling.

Last week on Morning Joe (MSNBC), Steve Rattner, one of the enablers of the Syndicate, approvingly said Biden planned to steal an additional $5.5 trillion from American citizens and businesses over the next 10 years through higher taxes.

Now the EPA is planning to require natural gas and coal fired power plants to eliminate nearly all their carbon dioxide emissions in just a little over a decade. That may involve stealing another trillion from shareholders in the utility companies and the gas and coal companies who will end up with stranded assets. Or from consumers who will pay much higher prices for electricity when the utilities pass through the cost of carbon sequestration to them.

Then there are the new proposed rules from the EPA, that will ensure 67% of new passenger cars and 25% of heavy trucks sold in the USA are all-electric by 2032. That's going to cost a bundle.

And how about Biden's attempt to shut down oil and gas drilling on federal lands and federal offshore leases? If he'd been successful in that, he would have stranded hundreds of billions in assets.

And as a part of this enterprise in theft, Joe Biden, the Godfather (aka "the Don", aka "The Big Guy") and other Democratic Politicians will hand out a ton of money to their contributors, green energy entrepreneurs and the like. They got a good start with the ridiculously-named "Inflation Reduction Act." A Wall Street Journal editorial estimates the green handouts and subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act will cost over $1 trillion.

I'm sure there are other examples. I know a bit about taxes and energy so am familiar with the ones described above. However, just as the mafia engages in many endeavors, like extortion, drugs, gambling, and theft, so too the Democratic Party crime syndicate must be stealing in other ways than just through taxation and energy.

This is not a slam on you and other esteemed board members who are Democratic Party sympathizers. You are simply mistaken, just like the innocents in Sinaloa who idolized El Chapo or the people in Medellin who loved Pablo Escobar. Hopefully with time you will learn.[/QUOTE]Damn. Repubs must be dumb as fuck if they can't uncover, reveal, charge, indict and convict "the Don", "the Big Guy" Joe Biden on all those terrible crimes you cited.

Especially with Biden being so old, confused and addle-brained I bet he would mistake a clear photo of his wife for a sexual assault accuser "not remotely his type" multiple times under oath even with millions of dollars riding on it.

Maybe all those Repubs missed it because they were blinded by light from Jewish Space Lasers.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2817092]Damn. Repubs must be dumb as fuck if they can't uncover, reveal, charge, indict and convict "the Don", "the Big Guy" Joe Biden on all those terrible crimes you cited.

[b]Especially with Biden being so old, confused and addle-brained I bet he would mistake a clear photo of his wife for a sexual assault accuser "not remotely his type" multiple times under oath even with millions of dollars riding on it.

Maybe all those Repubs missed it because they were blinded by light from Jewish Space Lasers.[/b][/QUOTE]LOL, Good one!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817032]Silly Republicans. If you're going to try to lock up Tony Soprano, do you go after Meadow and A. J. Soprano? Would you go after the kids of mob bosses? Of course not. You go after the capos and the lieutenants. The made men. In Biden's case, that's people like Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries and Merrick Garland. We're not literally talking "family" here.

The silly Republicans are hyper-focused on a tree and totally missing the forest. Yes, the Biden Family Criminal Syndicate is much, much bigger than the actual Biden family. The sums of money we're talking about are 100,000X greater than the measly amount Hunter received for attempted influence peddling.[/QUOTE]Hate the guy all you want, but criminal syndicate? None of the talking points in your post (even if some of them weren't outright ridiculous) don't rise to the level of criminality. You're talking about a dude who started making some more-or-less serious money only AFTER he stopped being Vice President. All he had to do to keep that Ka-Ching for good, is refrain from politics till the end of his natural life.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2817092]Damn. Repubs must be dumb as fuck if they can't uncover, reveal, charge, indict and convict "the Don", "the Big Guy" Joe Biden on all those terrible crimes you cited.

Especially with Biden being so old, confused and addle-brained I bet he would mistake a clear photo of his wife for a sexual assault accuser "not remotely his type" multiple times under oath even with millions of dollars riding on it.

Maybe all those Repubs missed it because they were blinded by light from Jewish Space Lasers.[/QUOTE]Yet they keep calling President Biden "senile". It makes one wonder if they know the meaning of the word.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2817140]Hate the guy all you want, but criminal syndicate? None of the talking points in your post (even if some of them weren't outright ridiculous) don't rise to the level of criminality. You're talking about a dude who started making some more-or-less serious money only AFTER he stopped being Vice President. All he had to do to keep that Ka-Ching for good, is refrain from politics till the end of his natural life.[/QUOTE]Do you think I'm that stupid Xpartan? Did you read the entire post? No, raising taxes and imposing crazy, draconian regulations are not crimes, in the legal sense. Handing out subsidies to favored industries and campaign contributors usually isnt either.

I don't disagree with you. I will say that Biden exercised extremely poor judgement in loading Hunter onto that plane when he went to China as Vice President. And he shouldn't have telegraphed to the IRS and Justice Department that his son “did nothing wrong.” I read an IRS agent investigating Hunter had to get into the whistle blower program, presumably because higher ups figured tangling with Hunter wouldn't be good for their careers. Shades of Lois Lerner. Obama telegraphed to her that he didn't want any pro Republican organizations approved by the IRS, and she complied.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2817144]Yet they keep calling President Biden "senile". It makes one wonder if they know the meaning of the word.[/QUOTE]Senile, right. Like Vincent Gigante.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817341]Senile, right. Like Vincent Gigante.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/kamala-harris-is-the-reason-biden-is-running/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817341]Senile, right. Like Vincent Gigante.[/QUOTE]Great clip.

[URL]https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/05/09/nolte-tucker-carlson-announces-new-show-on-twitter-soon/[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2816778]This is a must watch for half the participants here:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX74Hij3aMM[/URL]

And its funny as FK for the rest.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/how-can-anybody-take-them-seriously/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817332]Do you think I'm that stupid Xpartan? [/QUOTE]No.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817332]Did you read the entire post? [/QUOTE]Yes.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2817332]No, raising taxes and imposing crazy, draconian regulations are not crimes, in the legal sense. Handing out subsidies to favored industries and campaign contributors usually isnt either.[/QUOTE]Exactly!

You don't like the guy and his policies, and that's fine.

But at least you can see why that "criminal syndicate" thingy didn't seat well with me.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2817929]No.

Yes.

Exactly!

You don't like the guy and his policies, and that's fine.

But at least you can see why that "criminal syndicate" thingy didn't seat well with me.[/QUOTE]I agree. Don't like his policies, cool. We can debate on it.

Accusing someone of a crime, have some evidence, not just hearsays, rumors, or conspiracy theories.

Side note, when the person who's leading the charge says, "Well, unfortunately we can't track down the informant. We are hopeful the informant is still there," a. How do you lose informant? Be. Couldn't you have recorded your conversations?

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2817497][URL]https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/kamala-harris-is-the-reason-biden-is-running/[/URL][/QUOTE]Good link Marquis. One thing to add, if Biden and Hillary Clinton hadn't run in 2020 and 2016 respectively, the Democratic nominee could very well have been a bsc Progressive like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren. Reasonable Democrats, like say Michael Bloomberg, Michael Bennet, Steve Bullock and John Hickenlooper never got traction. So Biden was the "closest to moderate" popular candidate the Democratic Party could come up with. The Democrats presumably would have more difficulty in the general election with a candidate like Sanders, than Biden. If the same situation exists in 2024 then maybe a Biden candidacy makes a lot of sense, from the Democrats' perspective.

The Progressives were able to have their cake and eat it too though. Biden was more electable than Sanders. And after the general election, he swung to the left. For example, it's hard to know whether Biden or Elizabeth Warren, through her accolytes installed throughout his administration, is calling the shots for financial regulation. And the Biden administration is pushing the Green agenda as hard as it can without ruining the Party's chances at the polls.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2817929]No.

Yes.

Exactly!

You don't like the guy and his policies, and that's fine.

But at least you can see why that "criminal syndicate" thingy didn't seat well with me.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2818187]I agree. Don't like his policies, cool. We can debate on it.

Accusing someone of a crime, have some evidence, not just hearsays, rumors, or conspiracy theories.

Side note, when the person who's leading the charge says, "Well, unfortunately we can't track down the informant. We are hopeful the informant is still there," a. How do you lose informant? Be. Couldn't you have recorded your conversations?[/QUOTE]Gentlemen, you're a bit too fixated on word choice and political correctness. I simply believe that, figuratively speaking, Biden and the majority of Congressional Democrats are thieves. At least socialists like Hugo Chavez pay compensation and leave the factories, oil and gas fields, and power plants standing after they nationalize industries. Through EPA regulations, the Biden administration wants to use a backdoor mechanism to shut down oil and gas fields and power plants. And some of his tax proposals border on thievery as well, although admittedly they're not as extreme as Bernie Sanders' or Elizabeth Warren's.

Remember when Greg Abbott and Ron DeSantis told the mayors and city councils in their states that they couldn't institute lockdowns or mask mandates? They were called mass murderers more than once. Now I'm no lockdown lover, but I can kind of see their point, in a figurative sense. But no, the governors weren't going around killing people and burying them in big pits. Anyway, I don't think you'd be coming to the defense of Abbott or DeSantis over the "Mass Murderer" label.

Very powerfully spoken:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuPISYnoBsM[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2818452]Gentlemen, you're a bit too fixated on word choice and political correctness. I simply believe that, figuratively speaking, Biden and the majority of Congressional Democrats are thieves. At least socialists like Hugo Chavez pay compensation and leave the factories, oil and gas fields, and power plants standing after they nationalize industries. Through EPA regulations, the Biden administration wants to use a backdoor mechanism to shut down oil and gas fields and power plants. And some of his tax proposals border on thievery as well, although admittedly they're not as extreme as Bernie Sanders' or Elizabeth Warren's.

Remember when Greg Abbott and Ron DeSantis told the mayors and city councils in their states that they couldn't institute lockdowns or mask mandates? They were called mass murderers more than once. Now I'm no lockdown lover, but I can kind of see their point, in a figurative sense. But no, the governors weren't going around killing people and burying them in big pits. Anyway, I don't think you'd be coming to the defense of Abbott or DeSantis over the "Mass Murderer" label.[/QUOTE]They are the governors of their states, within their rights to govern the way they want. So, no, I would not call them that. People can argue whether that's poor judgement or not, but that's the extend of the discord.

I think a way to get rid of corruption, or potential of, is to create a new amendment that states:

1. President's term in office is immunized, and statute of limitations of all crimes, with the exception of murder, shall begin at the end of the president's term. If convicted, all former presidential perks will be rescinded and disqualify from all future public post. This will provide the disincentive of doing something corrupt while in office. It does beg the question of "is anyone above the law?" However, it clears the wishy washy way of how the DOJ interpret their own standing on not to prosecute a sitting president.

2. Supreme Court Justices. Can not accept any gift from anyone.

3. (I think this is the biggest issue) Member of Congress / Senate; President; Supreme Court Justices shall have all assets managed in a blind trust or be published to the public. All trades would be reveal in real time by the brokerage firms.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2818492]They are the governors of their states, within their rights to govern the way they want. So, no, I would not call them that. People can argue whether that's poor judgement or not, but that's the extend of the discord.

I think a way to get rid of corruption, or potential of, is to create a new amendment that states:

1. President's term in office is immunized, and statute of limitations of all crimes, with the exception of murder, shall begin at the end of the president's term. If convicted, all former presidential perks will be rescinded and disqualify from all future public post. This will provide the disincentive of doing something corrupt while in office. It does beg the question of "is anyone above the law?" However, it clears the wishy washy way of how the DOJ interpret their own standing on not to prosecute a sitting president.

2. Supreme Court Justices. Can not accept any gift from anyone.

3. (I think this is the biggest issue) Member of Congress / Senate; President; Supreme Court Justices shall have all assets managed in a blind trust or be published to the public. All trades would be reveal in real time by the brokerage firms.[/QUOTE]I can't argue with that. I don't know whether the idea to publish all trades in real time is a Checkmate original, but if so kudos. That's a great idea.

I'm not sure whether or not I agree with "1". Here in the United States of America, we haven't ever sent an ex President to jail. That's part of what separates us from banana republics. We shouldn't even have to think about this. But Trump may have crossed the line after the 2020 election.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2818499]I can't argue with that. I don't know whether the idea to publish all trades in real time is a Checkmate original, but if so kudos. That's a great idea.

I'm not sure whether or not I agree with "1". Here in the United States of America, we haven't ever sent an ex President to jail. That's part of what separates us from banana republics. We shouldn't even have to think about this. But Trump may have crossed the line after the 2020 election.[/QUOTE]People use "banana republic" as a crutch to say that a President can't possibly commit crimes. ALL human are capable of committing crimes.

[QUOTE=CheckMate1;2818520]People use "banana republic" as a crutch to say that a President can't possibly commit crimes. ALL human are capable of committing crimes.[/QUOTE]All Americans DO commit crimes. Harvey Silverglate, the attorney, board member of the ACLU, and former Harvard Law school professor who wrote "Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent", says we commit an average of three crimes a day. We incarcerate more people per capita than any other country in the world. The Republicans want to put the Democratic Politicians in jail, and the Democrats want to put the Republican Politicians in jail. Democrats want to incarcerate white businessmen, and Republicans want to jail young black men.

A friend who's an attorney, a Democrat, and more partisan than Tooms believes the most likely reason Trump will go to jail will be because of the classified records violations. Well, say we throw him in the slammer for that. Then what do we do with Joe Biden and Mike Pence? They undoubtedly violated classified records laws too.

You put Trump in front of a jury in Washington, D.C. and there's a pretty good chance he'll be convicted even if the prosecution has a weak case. Ditto for Biden in Amarillo, Texas.

I believe you need a damn good reason to put an ex-president in jail. And like I said, there may be one related to Trump's post 2020 election shenanigans. As to confidential records and Stormy Daniels, that's just nuts. If Trump gets convicted on those charges then yeah, it's a sign we're becoming a banana republic. And yes, maybe the Donald contributed as much to that as anyone. Remember he tried to get the Justice Department to prosecute Hillary Clinton. Since I'm the founder of the Free Markets Church of Tiny, I'll quote a couple of relevant Biblical passages here,

He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword

An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth

Well, I say bull shit to that. Somebody just needs to say enough is enough and stop trying to put the other side in jail.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2818583]... Then what do we do with Joe Biden and Mike Pence? They undoubtedly violated classified records laws too....[/QUOTE]Pence and Biden found the documents themselves, reported them, returned them. Trump stole them, lied about them, hid them, instructed his attorneys to lie, obstructed the investigation, lied more and undoubtedly gave them to Putin.

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2818602]Pence and Biden found the documents themselves, reported them, returned them. Trump stole them, lied about them, hid them, instructed his attorneys to lie, obstructed the investigation, lied more and undoubtedly gave them to Putin.[/QUOTE]Yes. One would think Tiny's very smart, sensibly and justifiably partisan Dem attorney friend would have set aside 30 seconds of his busy day to explain that colossal difference between the Biden / Pence case and the Trump case. Maybe he has just given up trying to explain every important and significant detail about everything for his Repub / Bothsider / Neithersider friends. I know the feeling.

[QUOTE=JohnClayton;2818602]Pence and Biden found the documents themselves, reported them, returned them. Trump stole them, lied about them, hid them, instructed his attorneys to lie, obstructed the investigation, lied more and undoubtedly gave them to Putin.[/QUOTE]Biden's working for the Chinese and Trump's working for the Russians. Damn it, we're fucked.

[URL]https://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-stoked-outrage-over-184955929.html[/URL]

The story had all the hallmarks of fueling the maximum amount of right-wing outrage. With migrants being bused into New York City amid an immigration surge at the southern border, upstate New York hotels had supposedly kicked out homeless veterans in order to make room for the influx of asylum seekers.

After right-wing tabloid The New York Post published the sensational report last Friday, Fox News and Newsmax ran wild with it, devoting dozens of segments (and countless online articles) to the indignation of "people who served our country and need a little boost" getting displaced by "illegals," all while "these hotels are selling their soul for a check. ".

[B]Turns out, however, the whole story was made up.[/B]

The whole saga kicked off when the Post reported that 20 "struggling homeless veterans" were booted from hotels so their rooms could be given to incoming migrants. According to Yerik Israel Toney Foundation, the nonprofit group that works on temporarily housing the vets, the ex-military members had been told by the New York hotels that they needed to vacate and move elsewhere.

"One of the vets called me on Sunday,' YIT Foundation CEO Sharon Toney-Finch told the Post last week. "he told me he had to leave because the hotel said the extended stay is not available. Then I got another call. We didn't waste any time. '.

She added: "That's when we started on Monday to organize when and where to move them all. I am glad you called me today. Last night, I was crying. ".

According to Toney-Finch at the time, 15 of the veterans had been kicked out of the Crossroads Hotel in Newburgh, a community 60 minutes north of New York City. An additional five vets were reportedly removed from two other hotels in a nearby town. She claimed that all 20 of the vets were rebooked into another hotel in Hudson Valley. The area has recently experienced an influx of migrants as New York City Mayor Eric Adams has begun busing asylum seekers to other counties that may have additional space.

GOP State Assemblyman Brian Maher initially backed Toney-Finch's story, saying that "shining a light on this is important because we need to make sure these hotels know how important it is to respect the service of our veterans before they kick {them} out of hotels to make room. " Toney-Finch, meanwhile, added that the hotels were doing this for money since NYC was paying more for migrant accommodations than her group was offering the establishments.

Naturally, this story was absolute catnip for the right-wing media industrial complex. Fox News and its sister channel Fox Business began covering it immediately after the Post report dropped, frequently featuring prominent Republicans—including Maher—expressing their outrage over Democrats putting the needs of "illegal immigrants" over homeless vets. Newsmax followed suit shortly after.

"It's an embarrassment, a slap in the face to veterans, who are cast aside to allow for asylum seekers to come here," Maher told Fox & Friends First this week. "At the end of the day, you have combat veterans who are homeless and told to get out of their hotel, we have tried to let them know we appreciate them. We're embarrassed by what happened, but we have their backs. ".

The rhetoric coming from conservative pundits, however, was even more inflammatory.

During Monday's broadcast of Fox News midday panel show Outnumbered, for instance, Fox News contributor Lisa Marie Boothe said that this was "intentional" from President Joe Biden because "he is a globalist. " Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner added that Biden "doesn't mean it" whenever he says "God bless the troops" after a speech.

And while House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) called it "shameful" and GOP presidential hopeful Nikki Haley said this was "liberal insanity at work," other MAGA commentators went even further. "Fuck Democrats & their bullshit policies," Donald Trump Jr. Tweeted, sharing the original Post story.

However, earlier this week, local media began poking holes in the story. After Maher had provided a credit card receipt from Toney-Finch supposedly showing payment for the rooms at the Crossroads Hotel, The Mid-Hudson News reported that the hotel had no record of the transaction. Additionally, a graphics expert examined the receipt and said it appeared to be altered.

The manager of the hotel also told Mid-Hudson News that no veterans were ever at the hotel, let alone kicked out of Crossroads. No other guests had been displaced either, as the hotel had not been booked to capacity despite housing a group of migrants.

Eventually, Maher ended up denouncing the story as fake and emotionally told the Times-Union he was "devastated and disheartened" after finding out from Toney-Finch that she had made the whole thing up.

After doubt began to spread about the veracity of Toney-Finch's tale, Maher said he asked her to meet him at a local bank to get financial statements that would prove her organization paid for the veterans' rooms at the hotels. After she no-showed, he claimed he told her that he had "no choice but to report this" after she "alluded to the fact that, 'Maybe it's not exactly how I said it was. '.

In a separate conversation with the New York Post, which has since added an editor's note to its original bombshell story that kicked off this outrage cycle, Maher added that Toney-Finch said "I had to help the veterans," when he confronted her on peddling a hoax.

The story got even wilder on Friday, however, when Mid-Hudson News further reported that Toney-Finch had recruited a group of homeless men from a nearby shelter to pretend they were the military veterans that had been displaced by migrants.

"On Thursday night he met with a group of seven men at a homeless shelter," the report stated. "The men said that on Wednesday, two people came into the shelter saying they had work and needed 15 men between the ages of 40 and 60, to take a trip to meet with an elected official for a discussion on homelessness. They were each promised $200 along with food and alcohol. They were familiar with one of the recruiters, Diana, claiming she had previously stayed at the shelter. ".

YIT Foundation did not respond to The Daily Beast's request for comment.

While the New York Post has reported that the story is false and added editor's notes to other articles, [B]Fox News has yet to address the emerging hoax on its airwaves. In fact, on Thursday night, the network was still hosting local Republicans to rage about the fake controversy. Yvette Aguiar, the town supervisor of Riverhead, told Fox News host Will Cain that the “really disturbing” issue with the Crossroads Hotel “set me off on this journey” to declare a state of emergency regarding migrants.[/B].

Fox News has not responded to a request for comment on whether they will address this story on air.

Not only has Newsmax not reported that Toney-Finch lied about homeless vets being displaced, but the network had run at least three news segments claiming "homeless US veterans have been removed from housing to make room for migrants" on Friday. Newsmax also did not respond to a request for comment.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2818804][URL]https://news.yahoo.com/fox-news-stoked-outrage-over-184955929.html[/URL]

The story had all the hallmarks of fueling the maximum amount of right-wing outrage. With migrants being bused into New York City amid an immigration surge at the southern border, upstate New York hotels had supposedly kicked out homeless veterans in order to make room for the influx of asylum seekers.

After right-wing tabloid The New York Post published the sensational report last Friday, Fox News and Newsmax ran wild with it, devoting dozens of segments (and countless online articles) to the indignation of "people who served our country and need a little boost" getting displaced by "illegals," all while "these hotels are selling their soul for a check. ".

[B]Turns out, however, the whole story was made up.[/B]

The whole saga kicked off when the Post reported that 20 "struggling homeless veterans" were booted from hotels so their rooms could be given to incoming migrants. According to Yerik Israel Toney Foundation, the nonprofit group that works on temporarily housing the vets, the ex-military members had been told by the New York hotels that they needed to vacate and move elsewhere.

"One of the vets called me on Sunday,' YIT Foundation CEO Sharon Toney-Finch told the Post last week. "he told me he had to leave because the hotel said the extended stay is not available. Then I got another call. We didn't waste any time. '.

She added: "That's when we started on Monday to organize when and where to move them all. I am glad you called me today. Last night, I was crying. ".

According to Toney-Finch at the time, 15 of the veterans had been kicked out of the Crossroads Hotel in Newburgh, a community 60 minutes north of New York City. An additional five vets were reportedly removed from two other hotels in a nearby town. She claimed that all 20 of the vets were rebooked into another hotel in Hudson Valley. The area has recently experienced an influx of migrants as New York City Mayor Eric Adams has begun busing asylum seekers to other counties that may have additional space.

GOP State Assemblyman Brian Maher initially backed Toney-Finch's story, saying that "shining a light on this is important because we need to make sure these hotels know how important it is to respect the service of our veterans before they kick {them} out of hotels to make room. " Toney-Finch, meanwhile, added that the hotels were doing this for money since NYC was paying more for migrant accommodations than her group was offering the establishments.

Naturally, this story was absolute catnip for the right-wing media industrial complex. Fox News and its sister channel Fox Business began covering it immediately after the Post report dropped, frequently featuring prominent Republicansincluding Maherexpressing their outrage over Democrats putting the needs of "illegal immigrants" over homeless vets. Newsmax followed suit shortly after.

"It's an embarrassment, a slap in the face to veterans, who are cast aside to allow for asylum seekers to come here," Maher told Fox & Friends First this week. "At the end of the day, you have combat veterans who are homeless and told to get out of their hotel, we have tried to let them know we appreciate them. We're embarrassed by what happened, but we have their backs. ".

The rhetoric coming from conservative pundits, however, was even more inflammatory.

During Monday's broadcast of Fox News midday panel show Outnumbered, for instance, Fox News contributor Lisa Marie Boothe said that this was "intentional" from President Joe Biden because "he is a globalist. " Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner added that Biden "doesn't mean it" whenever he says "God bless the troops" after a speech.

And while House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) called it "shameful" and GOP presidential hopeful Nikki Haley said this was "liberal insanity at work," other MAGA commentators went even further. "Fuck Democrats & their bullshit policies," Donald Trump Jr. Tweeted, sharing the original Post story.

However, earlier this week, local media began poking holes in the story. After Maher had provided a credit card receipt from Toney-Finch supposedly showing payment for the rooms at the Crossroads Hotel, The Mid-Hudson News reported that the hotel had no record of the transaction. Additionally, a graphics expert examined the receipt and said it appeared to be altered.

The manager of the hotel also told Mid-Hudson News that no veterans were ever at the hotel, let alone kicked out of Crossroads. No other guests had been displaced either, as the hotel had not been booked to capacity despite housing a group of migrants.

Eventually, Maher ended up denouncing the story as fake and emotionally told the Times-Union he was "devastated and disheartened" after finding out from Toney-Finch that she had made the whole thing up.

After doubt began to spread about the veracity of Toney-Finch's tale, Maher said he asked her to meet him at a local bank to get financial statements that would prove her organization paid for the veterans' rooms at the hotels. After she no-showed, he claimed he told her that he had "no choice but to report this" after she "alluded to the fact that, 'Maybe it's not exactly how I said it was. '.

In a separate conversation with the New York Post, which has since added an editor's note to its original bombshell story that kicked off this outrage cycle, Maher added that Toney-Finch said "I had to help the veterans," when he confronted her on peddling a hoax.

The story got even wilder on Friday, however, when Mid-Hudson News further reported that Toney-Finch had recruited a group of homeless men from a nearby shelter to pretend they were the military veterans that had been displaced by migrants.

"On Thursday night he met with a group of seven men at a homeless shelter," the report stated. "The men said that on Wednesday, two people came into the shelter saying they had work and needed 15 men between the ages of 40 and 60, to take a trip to meet with an elected official for a discussion on homelessness. They were each promised $200 along with food and alcohol. They were familiar with one of the recruiters, Diana, claiming she had previously stayed at the shelter. ".

YIT Foundation did not respond to The Daily Beast's request for comment.

While the New York Post has reported that the story is false and added editor's notes to other articles, [B]Fox News has yet to address the emerging hoax on its airwaves. In fact, on Thursday night, the network was still hosting local Republicans to rage about the fake controversy. Yvette Aguiar, the town supervisor of Riverhead, told Fox News host Will Cain that the really disturbing issue with the Crossroads Hotel set me off on this journey to declare a state of emergency regarding migrants.[/B].

Fox News has not responded to a request for comment on whether they will address this story on air.

Not only has Newsmax not reported that Toney-Finch lied about homeless vets being displaced, but the network had run at least three news segments claiming "homeless US veterans have been removed from housing to make room for migrants" on Friday. Newsmax also did not respond to a request for comment.[/QUOTE]Well hooray for the New York Post! I see from the link to the original article that the New York Post tried to check the story by contacting The Crossroads Hotel, Super 8 Hotel, and hotel where the vets allegedly were staying after they moved, but none commented prior to when the article was published. When questions arose as to the veracity of Sharon Toney-Finch, the New York Post reported the article was false.

Compare to the mainstream, left-of-center media, which are mostly silent about or distorting John Durham's report. Take for example the allegation that Trump had two prostitutes urinate on a hotel bed in the Presidential Suite of the Ritz Carlton in Moscow. The same bed that President Obama slept in. Allegedly this was filmed by Russian intelligence, and used to get Trump to do Russia's bidding.

Well, according to Durham, the likely source of this story was Clinton crony Charles Dolan!

So how many of the left-of-center newspapers and television channels have retracted their stories about "Peegate?" Wouldn't you think that the people over at MSNBC, unlike the Fox New pundits in your story, be jumping through hoops to say they'd been had? Hell no. Of course not. The only Democratic-Party-loving publication I can find that's apologizing is the Washington Post.

Democrats are every bit as guilty of spreading bull shit propaganda as Republicans.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2819200]Well hooray for the New York Post! I see from the link to the original article that the New York Post tried to check the story by contacting The Crossroads Hotel, Super 8 Hotel, and hotel where the vets allegedly were staying after they moved, but none commented prior to when the article was published. When questions arose as to the veracity of Sharon Toney-Finch, the New York Post reported the article was false.

Compare to the mainstream, left-of-center media, which are mostly silent about or distorting John Durham's report.[b] Take for example the allegation that Trump had two prostitutes urinate on a hotel bed in the Presidential Suite of the Ritz Carlton in Moscow. The same bed that President Obama slept in. Allegedly this was filmed by Russian intelligence, and used to get Trump to do Russia's bidding.

Well, according to Durham, the likely source of this story was Clinton crony Charles Dolan![/b]

So how many of the left-of-center newspapers and television channels have retracted their stories about [b]"Peegate?"[/b] Wouldn't you think that the people over at [b]MSNBC[/b], unlike the Fox New pundits in your story, be jumping through hoops to say they'd been had? Hell no. Of course not. The only Democratic-Party-loving publication I can find that's apologizing is the Washington Post.

Democrats are every bit as guilty of spreading bull shit propaganda as Republicans.[/QUOTE]When and by whom did MSNBC devote so much as 10 minutes to whether or not Trump hired anyone to pee on anything? Particularly without stressing it was only an allegation? I must have missed that show.

Besides, it has always been obvious that Repubs only love Trump even more for boasting about sexually assaulting women, being found liable for it, paying "horse face" porn actresses $100,000+ to keep it to themselves, laying the foundation for, creating and developing Trump's Pandemic and virtually all the death, economic destruction, massive jobs destruction and inflation that followed, inciting cop-killing mobs of America-hating insurrectionists to violently overthrow American democracy and so on.

Why would any media outlet need to apologize to Trump for helping him shore up and solidify a clear popular advantage for him with Repub voters vs all the other potential Repub candidates with a little story about hookers he might have hired to urinate on him or whatever?

Trump should be thanking any and all media outlets that ran with that one.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2819200]Well hooray for the New York Post! I see from the link to the original article that the New York Post tried to check the story by contacting The Crossroads Hotel, Super 8 Hotel, and hotel where the vets allegedly were staying after they moved, but none commented prior to when the article was published. When questions arose as to the veracity of Sharon Toney-Finch, the New York Post reported the article was false.

Compare to the mainstream, left-of-center media, which are mostly silent about or distorting John Durham's report. Take for example the allegation that Trump had two prostitutes urinate on a hotel bed in the Presidential Suite of the Ritz Carlton in Moscow. The same bed that President Obama slept in. Allegedly this was filmed by Russian intelligence, and used to get Trump to do Russia's bidding.

Well, according to Durham, the likely source of this story was Clinton crony Charles Dolan!

So how many of the left-of-center newspapers and television channels have retracted their stories about "Peegate?" Wouldn't you think that the people over at MSNBC, unlike the Fox New pundits in your story, be jumping through hoops to say they'd been had? Hell no. Of course not. The only Democratic-Party-loving publication I can find that's apologizing is the Washington Post.

Democrats are every bit as guilty of spreading bull shit propaganda as Republicans.[/QUOTE]What did the Durham Report that was recently released [B]actually uncover[/B] that hadn't been reported earlier? [URL]https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf[/URL] The answer to that question is [B]absolutely nothing[/B]. And how many convictions came out of Durham's work? [B]None[/B]. As a comparison, what came out of the Mueller Report? 34 indictments and 8 folks either pled guilty or were convicted of felonies.

Since folks love to keep score, that's 8 guilty because of Mueller and 0 guilty because of Durham.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2819309]When and by whom did MSNBC devote so much as 10 minutes to whether or not Trump hired anyone to pee on anything? Particularly without stressing it was only an allegation? I must have missed that show.[/QUOTE]I totally believe the peeing story for 2 reasons.

1. It sounds totally like Trump. Everything we know about him indicates that it was totally within his character to ask a hooker to pee on the "Obama's" bed.

2, It would've been impossible to make this up. Just think about it: Can you imagine that Igor Danchenko just woke up one morning and came up with this brilliant, deliberate lie?

[QUOTE]The claim came from Igor Danchenko, a Russia analyst who gathered leads about possible Trump-Russia links for what turned out to be Democratic-funded opposition research. In an interview, Mr. Danchenko described hearing rumors from two sources about a possible sex tape involving Mr. Trump and the Ritz-Carlton, then obtaining more nebulous information from two hotel employees he took as corroborative.

Acknowledging that the material was too thin to amount to proof and saying that he himself remained skeptical, Mr. Danchenko defended the integrity of his work.

He said he was assigned simply to gather raw intelligence for his employer, Christopher Steele, and passed along claims that raised a potential red flag. He noted that he was not responsible for how Mr. Steele portrayed that information in the dossier, nor for making it public.

Even raw intelligence from credible sources, I take it with a grain of salt, Mr. Danchenko said. Who knows, what if its not particularly accurate? Is it just a rumor or is there more to it?[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/21/us/politics/igor-danchenko-steele-dossier.html[/URL]

Mark my words: one day we will see that tape, LOL.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2819421]I totally believe the peeing story for 2 reasons.

1. It sounds totally like Trump. Everything we know about him indicates that it was totally within his character to ask a hooker to pee on the "Obama's" bed.

2, It would've been impossible to make this up. Just think about it: Can you imagine that Igor Danchenko just woke up one morning and came up with this brilliant, deliberate lie?

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/21/us/politics/igor-danchenko-steele-dossier.html[/URL]

Mark my words: one day we will see that tape, LOL.[/QUOTE]You were lied to. Danchenko got the story from Charles Dolan, Clinton family crony. Trump never stayed in the Ritz Carlton Presidential Suite, which is where Obama stayed when he was in Moscow. See pages 140 to 148 of Durham's report:

[URL]https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2819309]When and by whom did MSNBC devote so much as 10 minutes to whether or not Trump hired anyone to pee on anything? Particularly without stressing it was only an allegation? I must have missed that show.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-story-appears-change-details-moscow-trip-msna1094726[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/one-trumps-key-russia-claims-starts-unravel-msna1093851[/URL]

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/here-s-why-comey-memos-hurt-trump-more-help-him-n867741?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2018-03-12-msna1078246[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2017-12-08-msna1048041[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/hardball/2018-04-20-msna1093621[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/the-last-word/2018-04-12-msna1090256[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/comey-book-trump-wanted-prostitute-story-proven-false-1209855555959[/URL]

Here MSNBC admits the story came from "PR-Executive 1", not Danchenko, but conveniently omits that PR-Executive 1 is Clinton crony Charles Dolan.

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/analyst-who-worked-steele-dossier-arrested-part-trump-era-doj-n1283197?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma[/URL]

There's lots more but I'm tired of copying and pasting.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2819309]Why would any media outlet need to apologize to Trump for helping him shore up and solidify a clear popular advantage for him with Repub voters vs all the other potential Repub candidates with a little story about hookers he might have hired to urinate on him or whatever?[/QUOTE]

So you're saying media outlets should promote lies about Trump because he's a bad hombre? The ends justify the means? That was the modus operandi of Machiavelli and Stalin. Or maybe you mean that paying hookers to piss on beds that your political opponents slept in is a great way to appeal to voters? But that would be ridiculous.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2819317]What did the Durham Report that was recently released [B]actually uncover[/B] that hadn't been reported earlier? [URL]https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf[/URL] The answer to that question is [B]absolutely nothing[/B]. And how many convictions came out of Durham's work? [B]None[/B]. As a comparison, what came out of the Mueller Report? 34 indictments and 8 folks either pled guilty or were convicted of felonies.

Since folks love to keep score, that's 8 guilty because of Mueller and 0 guilty because of Durham.[/QUOTE]So what were those 8 people convicted of? Answer: Two on tax charges. A couple on failing to register correctly as lobbyists. And the rest for lying. That's not counting the ridiculous charge against Cohen for an illegal campaign contribution, because he channeled money from Trump to Stormy Daniels.

And how many of them pleaded guilty, so they wouldn't be bankrupted or suffer financial hardship from trying to defend themselves? Well, I think as many as eight.

This is a great example of Democrats' superiority when it comes to fucking over the opposite side. See bold print below.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2818583] The Republicans want to put the Democratic Politicians in jail, and [b]the Democrats want to put the Republican Politicians in jail. Democrats want to incarcerate white businessmen,[/b] and Republicans want to jail young black men.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2819484][URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-story-appears-change-details-moscow-trip-msna1094726[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/one-trumps-key-russia-claims-starts-unravel-msna1093851[/URL]

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/here-s-why-comey-memos-hurt-trump-more-help-him-n867741?cid=sm_npd_ms_tw_ma[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2018-03-12-msna1078246[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/rachel-maddow-show/2017-12-08-msna1048041[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/hardball/2018-04-20-msna1093621[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/the-last-word/2018-04-12-msna1090256[/URL]

[URL]https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/comey-book-trump-wanted-prostitute-story-proven-false-1209855555959[/URL].[/QUOTE]Yeah, but you didn't get tired of quoting the supposedly damning assertions by Maddow or anyone else on MSNBC that did not clearly qualify any all of of this, especially what you refer to as "Peegate", as unproven allegations, even at least one time where Maddow drew the allegation into question on Trump's behalf, right?

Because you did not include any.

Maddow, in one of your first links supporting my position on it:

[QUOTE]Now on the subject of the aforementioned alleged golden showers, I just -- I just leave my body, I`ll be back in a minute. David Corn and Michael Isikoff`s new book actually I think knocks down a few pegs the odds that that particular thing ever really happened.[/QUOTE]Did Trump send her a Thank You note for that extraordinary show of support for him and apologize to her for anything negative he ever said about her?

You do realize those links are primarily reporting what was actually happening at the time, particularly with regard to what Trump's fellow Repub liar and huge 2016 election victory asset Comey was stating, right?

[URL]https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/05/23/nolte-59-voters-agree-media-truly-enemy-people/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2819481]You were lied to. Danchenko got the story from Charles Dolan, Clinton family crony. Trump never stayed in the Ritz Carlton Presidential Suite, which is where Obama stayed when he was in Moscow. See pages 140 to 148 of Durham's report:

[URL]https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf[/URL][/QUOTE]Did you read the full report? I won't lie to you. I'm not going to invest my valuable time into reading a 316-pages opus, which, I believe, was simply a politically-motivated attempt to discredit the FBI investigation (or rather investigations) and Mueller's report.

But I did read the section pertaining to the above-mentioned sex scandal (starting page 144). What I have found there contradicts your statement.

[QUOTE]When interviewed by the Office, Dolan's recollection about taking a tour ofthe Presidential suite at the Ritz Carlton was inconsistent and his recollection vacillated over the course of several interviews. Dolan stated, in sum, that it was possible that he (Dolan) told Danchenko about the Presidential Suite and Trump, but he had no specific recollection of doing so. [b]Dolan was adamant that he never told Danchenko about any salacious sexual activity that occurred in the suite.[/b][/QUOTE]You might say Dolan could've lied, and you'd be right -- he could have. But that would mean opening himself to criminal prosecution, which, again, has been done before, no arguments there. However, your assurances ("You were lied to" and "Danchenko got the story from Charles Dolan, Clinton family crony. ") are way too bold considering you have no evidence to back them up.

That said, if I missed something, please point me to the right passage.

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2820256][URL]https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/05/23/nolte-59-voters-agree-media-truly-enemy-people/[/URL][/QUOTE][QUOTE]1* Do you trust the political news you are getting?

2* Does news media coverage of politics generally tend to favor Democrats or Republicans? Or is political coverage in the news media mostly neutral and balanced?

3* Do you agree or disagree with this statement: The media are truly the enemy of the people?[/QUOTE]Nevermind asking them what is the usual source of the "political news" they are getting. Fux News? Breitbart?

Or even what they consider "political news" in the first place. "The winner of the 2020 presidential election is Joe Biden", "Today we examine the difference between a 2022 Red Tsunami and a 2022 Pink Tinkle"? Yeah, for sure if they consider accurate reports on the state of the economy over the past 100 years to be "political news", their impression would definitely be that those reports favor Democrats. Unavoidably.

I wonder what the response would have been to, "Do you believe in demons and ghosts"?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2820452]Nevermind asking them what is the usual source of the "political news" they are getting. Fux News? Breitbart?

Or even what they consider "political news" in the first place. "The winner of the 2020 presidential election is Joe Biden", "Today we examine the difference between a 2022 Red Tsunami and a 2022 Pink Tinkle"? Yeah, for sure if they consider accurate reports on the state of the economy over the past 100 years to be "political news", their impression would definitely be that those reports favor Democrats. Unavoidably.

I wonder what the response would have been to, "Do you believe in demons and ghosts"?[/QUOTE]STATISTICS: Every statistic can be bent to represent some positive aspects of your position.

Ex1: 9 out of 10 doctors say that smoking cause cancer. Reported: Not every doctor agrees with smoking as a cause for cancer.

EX2: Some scientists disagree with the idea that human contribute to climate change.

Instead of reading headlines and running with them, ask how many agrees and how many disagrees; then ask if a poll consists of 100 scientists, is this a good enough number to have a consensus?

POLLS: Only poll that matters is total number of votes.

People like to fill the void between elections with this shit. Tell people to vote, not how. And then when everyone voted, tabulate and present the results. We are 18 months away from the next national election. Let me give you a guarantee, things will change between now and election day. Book it!

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2820256][URL]https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/05/23/nolte-59-voters-agree-media-truly-enemy-people/[/URL][/QUOTE]The respondents were certainly right about media coverage favoring Democrats. From your link,

"Does news media coverage of politics generally tend to favor Democrats or Republicans?" Only 20 percent said Republicans, while 52 percent accurately said Democrats. Even 39 percent of Democrats said the news media favor Democrats. Conversely, only 21 percent of Democrats said the media favored Republicans. "

From a Ballotpedia fact check, 96% of of donations to either Clinton or Trump between January, 2015 and August, 2016 went to Clinton,

[URL]https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journalist_donations_go_to_Democrats[/URL]

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2820256][URL]https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2023/05/23/nolte-59-voters-agree-media-truly-enemy-people/[/URL][/QUOTE]Do you know who else said that the press is the enemy of the people? Hitler did. Stalin called all of his enemies "enemies of the people". So did Mao. So did Hoxha of Albania. So did the one-term, twice-impeached, convicted-of-sexual-assault former guy.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2820423]Did you read the full report? I won't lie to you. I'm not going to invest my valuable time into reading a 316-pages opus, which, I believe, was simply a politically-motivated attempt to discredit the FBI investigation (or rather investigations) and Mueller's report.

But I did read the section pertaining to the above-mentioned sex scandal (starting page 144). What I have found there contradicts your statement.

You might say Dolan could've lied, and you'd be right -- he could have. But that would mean opening himself to criminal prosecution, which, again, has been done before, no arguments there. However, your assurances ("You were lied to" and "Danchenko got the story from Charles Dolan, Clinton family crony. ") are way too bold considering you have no evidence to back them up.

That said, if I missed something, please point me to the right passage.[/QUOTE]

OK, granted, my earlier characterization, "the likely source of this story was Clinton crony Charles Dolan," is more accurate. You're a smart guy. As to this one controversy though, "Peegate", you look either marginally more informed or marginally less naive than the tens of millions of Americans who believe Donald Trump won the 2020 election.

If you're going to call the Durham Report a Republican Party hit piece, you should be able tell us why the Mueller Report was not a Democratic Party hit piece, in a more substantive way than Tooms did. Convicting people for lying, failing to register as foreign lobbyists, tax evasion, and giving your attorney money to keep an affair quiet won't cut it.

OK, here's the Cliff Notes version, which I've mostly copied and pasted. You really need to read the sections about Danchenko and Dolan in the report to get a good flavor for what happened. See bold text in particular for Dolan's involvement. Add to what follows that Trump never slept in the presidential suite at the Ritz Carlton.

From 2005 through 2010, Igor Danchenko worked as an analyst at the Brookings Institution in Washington, District of Columbia.

In approximately 2010, Brookings Fellow-I introduced Danchenko to Christopher Steele. Steele retained Danchenko as a contractor for his London-based firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.

As discussed in more detail below, from January 2017 through October 2020, and as part of its efforts to determine the truth or falsity of specific information in the Steele Reports, the FBI conducted multiple interviews of Danchenko regarding, among other things, the allegations that he provided to Steele that ultimately formed the core of the Steele Reports. During these extensive interviews, Danchenko was unable to provide the FBI with corroborating evidence for any of the substantive allegations contained in the Steele Reports. In fact, Danchenko claimed that the Ritz Carlton allegations he provided to Steele were nothing more than "rumor and speculation," and that most of the information he gathered for Steele was the product of casual conversation with people in his social circle, including those parts ofthe Steele Reports used in the Page FISA applications.


Danchenko Employer-! Executive-!, an ethnic Russian, described Danchenko as someone who was "boastful ... having low credibility, and a person who liked to embellish his purported contacts with the Kremlin."

Banking and other records also show that from January of 2016 through June 2021, Danchenko received over $436,000 in wire transfers from European businesses, including from Orbis and other entities affiliated with Orbis. These money transfers were in addition to the money that Orbis sent through Danchenko Employer-I to fund Danchenko's salary. (Remember Orbis is Steele's company. Orbis was channeling part of its payments to Danchenko through Employer-I in a scheme to allow Danchenko to obtain a U.S. visa.)

Danchenko was a known entity to the FBI in December 2016 when he was identified as Steele's primary sub-source. As publicly reported, Danchenko was the subject of an FBI counterespionage investigation from 2009 to 2011. 719 In late 2008, while employed by the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., Danchenko engaged two fellow employees ("Brookings Researcher- I" and "Brookings Researcher-2") at a happy hour about whether one of the employees might be willing or able in the future to provide classified information in exchange for money.

According to Brookings Researcher- I, Danchenko believed that he (Brookings Researcher-I) might also enter the Obama administration with the foreign policy advisor and have access to classified information. During this exchange, Danchenko informed Brookings Researcher- I that he (Danchenko) had access to people who would be willing to pay money for classified inforrnation.


Based on the information provided by Brookings Researcher-I, the FBI's Baltimore Field Office initiated a preliminary espionage investigation into Danchenko. 728 Two Baltimore Field
Office Agents led the investigation into Danchenko ("Baltimore Case Agent- I" and "Baltimore Case Agent-2"). Brian Auten, who was at the time an Intelligence Analyst (IA) as opposed to a
Supervisory IA, provided Headquarters analytical support to the investigation. The FBI converted its investigation of Danchenko into a "full investigation" after learning that Danchenko (i) had been identified as an associate oftwo other FBI espionage subjects, and (ii) had previous contact with the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers. 729 In
particular, the FBI learned that in September 2006, Danchenko informed one Russian intelligence officer that he had an interest in entering the Russian diplomatic service. Four
days later, the intelligence officer contacted Danchenko and informed him that they could meet that day to work "on the documents and then think about future plans.'' In October 2006,
Danchenko contacted the intelligence officer "so the documents can be placed in (the followingday's) diplomatic mail pouch

The person described in the following was a classmate of Danchenko's at Georgetown who interned with an intelligence agency:

On one occasion, Danchenko inquired about the person's knowledge of a specific Russian military matter. That same person stated, in sum, that Danchenko informed her that he served in the Russian army and worked with rockets, but at the time worked on "special" matters. Danchenko also told this person that his Russian passport listed him as GRU (the Russian military intelligence service) because of his language skills. Based on these encounters, the individual believed that Danchenko was working for a Russian intelligence service.

Up next, Danchenko becomes a paid informant for the FBI!

Danchenko was interviewed by the FBI in January 2017 following his identification in December 2016 as Steele's primary sub-source. FBI materials reviewed by the Office revealed
that the primary purpose for the FBI's initial engagement with Danchenko in January 2017 was to recruit him as a paid CHS (confidential human source). If this recruitment was successful, the FBI planned to mine Danchenko for information that was corroborative of the damaging allegations about Presidentelect Trump in the Steele Reports.

The FBI granted him immunity, with the idea of having Danchenko identify his sources and provide evidence to corroborate the Steele Reports.

However....Danchenko was not able to provide any corroborative evidence related to any substantive allegation contained in the Steele Reports - and critically- was unable to corroborate any of the FBI's assertions contained in the Carter Page FISA applications.

So what does the FBI do, despite it's knowledge of the preceding, and its knowledge that Danchenko allegedly was working for Russian intelligence? They engage Danchenko as a paid informant! They pay him $220,000 over a 3 and a half year period.

Now, about Charles Dolan,

[b]When interviewed by the FBI in June 2017, Danchenko failed to disclose the role a U.S. based individual named Charles Dolan played in the reporting Danchenko provided for inclusion
in the Steele Reports. In particular, Danchenko denied that Dolan provided any specific information contained in the Steele Reports. However, Dolan acknowledged to the Office that
he provided information to Danchenko related to Paul Manafort's firing as Trump campaign manager.Dolan further ad mitted to the Office that this allegation, which appears in Steele
Report 2016/105, was fabricated. [/b]

Charles Dolan is a public relations professional who in 2016 was employed by a Washington, D.C.-based public relations firm called kglobal. [b] In addition to his work as a
public relations professional, Dolan had previously served as (i) Executive Director of the Democratic Governors Association, (ii) Virginia Chairman of former President C!inton' s 1992
and 1996 presidential campaigns, and (iii) an advisor to Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign. Moreover, beginning in 1997, President Clinton appointed Dolan to two four-year
terms on the State Department's U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. [/b]

Just when you think this story can't get more bizarre, Dolan was a hired gun for Russia. He was gathering intelligence and passing it back to the Russian government.

In April 2016, Dolan asked Danchenko to assist Dolan and U.S. Person- I with the YPO (Opportunities in Russia) conference, which Danchenko agreed to do. Dolan believed that Danchenko's language skills and his supposed contacts in the Russian government would be of assistance to the conference. Dolan subsequently asked and received permission from U.S. Person-I to enlist Danchenko to assist with logistics, provide translation services, and present on various relevant topics at the YPO Conference. In preparation for the YPO Conference, Dolan and U.S. Person-I planned to travel to Moscow in June 2016 to view the Ritz Carlton and other potential sites for the conference (the "June Planning Trip"). At the same time, Danchenko informed Dolan that he (Danchenko) would be present in Moscow in June on other business.

The report goes on to document that Steele almost certainly received certain information, indirectly, that only could have originated with Dolan.

Dolan says in a message to an acquaintance,

On Monday night I fly to Moscow and will meet with a Russian guy (Danchenko) who is working with me on a couple of projects. He also works for a group of former MI 6 guys in London who do intelligence for businesses.[b] Send me your questions and I'll pass them on to Igor. He owes me as his Visa is being held up and I am having a word with the Ambassador.

Danchenko (who was present in Moscow at the same time as Dolan, in June, 2016), did not stay at the Ritz Carlton during the June Planning Trip - a fact that was
confirmed by hotel records.

While in Moscow, Dolan and U.S. Person-I participated in, among other things, (i) a meeting with the German-national general manager ofthe Ritz Carlton, and at least one female
hotel staff member to discuss the logistics of the YPO Conference, (ii) a lunch with the general manager and three hotel staff members who assisted in the preparations for the YPO conference,
and (iii) a tour of the hotel. As discussed in detail below, the general manager and other hotel staff members would later appear in the Steele Reports.


According to
Dolan, Danchenko was not present for any events at the Ritz Carlton during the June Planning Trip

On June 15, 2016, Dolan emailed an acquaintance from Moscow: "I'm in Russia making plans to be adopted in the event this mad man (Trump) gets e!ected."[/b]

So, Dolan and Danchenko are in Moscow at the same time and are talking. Dolan's staying at the Ritz Carlton and talking to hotel staff and probably passing on info to Danchenko, who's working for Steele, who's preparing a hit piece for Hillary Clinton to use against Donald Trump. A few days later, Steele issues one of his reports. It alleges,

According to Source D (Danchenko), wheres/he had been present, TRUMP's (perverted) conduct in Moscow included hiring the presidential suite ofthe Ritz Carlton,
where he knew President and Mrs OBAMA (whom he hated) had stayed on one oftheir official trips to Russia, and defiling the bed where they had slept by
employing a number of prostitutes to perform 'golden showers' ( urination) shows in front of him. The hotel was known to be under FSB control with microphones
and concealed cameras in all the main rooms to record anything they wanted to.

The Ritz Carlton episode involving TRUMP reported above was confirmed by Source E, a senior (western) member of staff at the hotel, who said thats/he and
several of the staff were aware of it at the time and subsequently. S/he believed it had happened in 2013. Source E provided an introduction for a company ethnic
Russian operative to Source F, a female staffer at the hotel when TRUMP had stayed there, who also confirmed the story.

[b]Certain ofthe information in the June 20, 20 l 6 Steele Report reflected facts that Dolan learned during the June Planning Trip to Moscow. For example, while at the Ritz Carlton, Dolan
(1) received a tour ofthe hotel and (according to Dolan) possibly the Presidential Suite, and (2) met with the senior Westem member of staff - in context the general manager - and other staff
ofthe Ritz Carlton. As noted, Danchenko did not stay at the Ritz Carlton in June 2016, but had lunch with Dolan during the June Planning Trip at some other location. [/b]

Here's the part that has people convinced Dolan was the source. Please note the next to last sentence in the next paragraph, in particular,

[b]Notably, when interviewed by the Office, U.S. Person- I recalled he and Dolan took a tour of the Presidential Suite. Following his initial interview with the Office, Dolan called
U.S. Person-I and U.S. Person-I confirmed that he (U.S. Person-I) and Dolan had in fact taken a tour ofthe Presidential Suite. During that tour, a hotel staff member told the participants that
Trump had previously been a guest in the Presidential Suite. According to U.S. Person-I, the staff member informed them that Donald Trump had stayed in the Suite, but did not mention any
sexual or salacious activity. When interviewed by the Office, Dolan's recollection about taking a tour ofthe Presidential suite at the Ritz Carlton was inconsistent and his recollection
vacillated over the course of several interviews. Dolan stated, in sum, that it was possible that he (Dolan) told Danchenko about the Presidential Suite and Trump, but he had no specific
recollection of doing so. Dolan was adamant that he never told Danchenko about any salacious sexual activity that occurred in the suite.[/b]

The Office also interviewed the then-general Manager of the Ritz-Carlton Moscow. The general manager, a German citizen who does not speak Russian, was described in the Steele
Report as a "senior (western) member of staff at the hotel and identified as "Source E."[b] The general manager did not recognize the photograph of Danchenko he was shown by the Office.

He also denied having knowledge ofthe Ritz-Carlton allegations concerning Trump at any time prior to their being reported in the media. 856 As such, the general manager adamantly denied
discussing such allegations with, or hearing them from, Danchenko, or anyone else. Further, the Office obtained records from the Ritz Carlton Moscow that reveal that Trump was a guest at
the hotel in 2013, but did not stay in the Presidential Suite then or at any other time. [/b]

When interviewed by the FBI in January 2017, Danchenko claimed that he had sourced this information, in part, while staying at the Ritz-Carlton Moscow during the June Planning
Trip. While Danchenko initially told the FBI that he had been a guest at the Ritz-Carlton Moscow during the June Planning Trip, in a later interview, he acknowledged that he had visited,
but not stayed at, the hotel during that June Planning Trip. (See how his story changed.) Danchenko also claimed that he inquired about the Ritz-Carlton allegations with hotel staff who did not deny their validity. Finally, Danchenko told the FBI that he reported the names of these hotel staff members to Christopher Steele. In his September 2017 interview, Steele also told the FBI that "Source E"
and "Source F" were employees at the Ritz Carlton Moscow with whom his primary sub-source
(Danchenko) personally met.

The Office found the general manager's statement that he never met with Danchenko to be credible, especially in light of his well-spoken, thoughtful demeanor, and his confidence in his
recollections. [b]Based on the above analysis, the only person who met with both Danchenko and the Ritz Carlton general manager (and the other managers) during the June Planning Trip was Dolan.

In light of these facts, there appears to be a real likelihood that Dolan was the actual source of much of the Ritz Carlton and Pavlov information contained in the Steele Reports.
[/b]

About a meeting Dolan had the following month, in July, 2016, in Cyprus,

During the July 2016 meetings in Cyprus, Dolan gave Galkina an autobiography of Clinton, which he signed and inscribed with the handwritten message, "To my good friend Olga, A Great Democrat"

On July 22, 2016, Dolan sent an email to Galkina and informed her that he would be attending a reception for Hillary Clinton. Shortly thereafter, Galkina responded: "Tell her
please she (Clinton)has a big fan in Cyprus. Can I please ask you to sign for me her (anything)." In August 2016, Galkina sent a message to a Russia-based associate describing
Dolan as an "advisor" to Hillary Clinton. Galkina further commented regarding what might happen if Clinton were to win the U.S. presidential election, stating in Russian, "When Dolan
takes me off to the State Department to handle issues of the former USSR, then we'll see who is looking good and who is not."

Galkina made the same assertion to another person, and in a message sent the day before the November, 2020 election, wrote Dolan that she hopes Hillary and all her supporters have a great Victory day.

The report goes on to document instances, unrelated to Peegate, where Dolan is undoubtedly, directly or indirectly, one of Steele's sources. They're mostly related to Manafort.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2820706]The respondents were certainly right about media coverage favoring Democrats. From your link,

"Does news media coverage of politics generally tend to favor Democrats or Republicans?" Only 20 percent said Republicans, while 52 percent accurately said Democrats. Even 39 percent of Democrats said the news media favor Democrats. Conversely, only 21 percent of Democrats said the media favored Republicans. "

From a Ballotpedia fact check, 96% of of donations to either Clinton or Trump between January, 2015 and August, 2016 went to Clinton,

[URL]https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journalist_donations_go_to_Democrats[/URL][/QUOTE]Sorry, I meant to write 96% of donations to either Clinton or Trump [B]from journalists[/B] between January, 2015 and August, 2016 went to Clinton.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2820706]The respondents were certainly right about media coverage favoring Democrats. From your link,

"Does news media coverage of politics generally tend to favor Democrats or Republicans?" Only 20 percent said Republicans, while 52 percent accurately said Democrats. Even 39 percent of Democrats said the news media favor Democrats. Conversely, only 21 percent of Democrats said the media favored Republicans. "

From a Ballotpedia fact check, 96% of of donations to either Clinton or Trump between January, 2015 and August, 2016 went to Clinton,

[URL]https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Do_97_percent_of_journalist_donations_go_to_Democrats[/URL][/QUOTE]It is also plausible that 97% of donations from people who don't know anything about anything and couldn't even discern the difference between a Great Repub Recession / Massive Jobs Destruction and a Great Dem Expansion / Historic Jobs Creation went to Trump in 2016 and in 2020 as well as to every Repub since Hoover.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2820723]Sorry, I meant to write 96% of donations to either Clinton or Trump [B]from journalists[/B] between January, 2015 and August, 2016 went to Clinton.[/QUOTE]LOL. Who are the numbskull journalists in that 4% whose job it is to actually follow, research, observe, know and report the mechanics of a complex national economy, national security, etc and the current as well as historical results of such yet still give donations to Repubs anyway? And to Trump of all Repub grifters and clowns!

I mean, it is understandable that they spin headlines and stories to lift Repub policy results to at least look vaguely within a "Bothsider / Neithersider" shot of keeping the horse race neck in neck to the finish. Their business model requires it.

But with their family, friends and neighbors' jobs, home values, household wealth and security on the line re those Repub donations?

I guess it takes all kinds. LOL.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2820905]LOL. Who are the numbskull journalists in that 4% whose job it is to actually follow, research, observe, know and report the mechanics of a complex national economy, national security, etc and the current as well as historical results of such yet still give donations to Repubs anyway? And to Trump of all Repub grifters and clowns!

I mean, it is understandable that they spin headlines and stories to lift Repub policy results to at least look vaguely within a "Bothsider / Neithersider" shot of keeping the horse race neck in neck to the finish. Their business model requires it.

But with their family, friends and neighbors' jobs, home values, household wealth and security on the line re those Repub donations?

I guess it takes all kinds. LOL.[/QUOTE]I actually donated to Hillary's campaign in 2016. I wish she'd won. Republicans would have done much better in the 2020 election if Hillary had been president. People vote based on the state of the economy, and the economy was going to suck regardless of who was president during the COVID pandemic. Also the Republican Party cannot do well in elections as long as Trump is its figurehead.

With more Republicans in Congress, there would have been no American Rescue Plan, which kickstarted inflation. And which when combined with other legislation, all passed by a Democrat President and Congress, will result in 5 trillion in additional unfunded spending. It's the bankrupting of America.

Hillary might just have turned out like Bill Clinton in his second term, that is, willing to work with Republicans for the good of all Americans, instead of being willing to work with far left progressives like Elizabeth Warren for the benefit of no one except special interests, like renewable energy companies, chip manufacturers and contractors. That's what Biden's doing. Remember that the last time we balanced the budget was under Bill Clinton and a Republican House.

Haven't been on this thread for months as common sense tells you that you can't argue with stupidity. It doesn't take much research to see how Biden has destroyed the USA. It doesn't take research to see how Biden has destroyed the economy and driven inflation to 40 year highs. It doesn't take research to see how knumbskulls still support open and dangerous borders, crime ridden cities, woke politics. Large corporations like Target and Budweiser have learned the hard way how wokeness can piss off loyal hard working customers. Stupid liberal democrats still support the destruction of America and still votes for socialists communist ways in their cities making them the most dangerous places to live. Nordstrom closing their stores in downtown SF because unsafe for employees to go to work. Watch all the stupid people get conned again in our state by offering reparations to blacks. These communist leaders know they won't ever pay that but they will dangle it out to the stupid that will believe and vote them in again. 88% of the people in the USA think the USA is headed in the wrong direction. Poverty at an all time high. Homelessness at an all time high, Crime at an all time high. Inflation at an all time high. Drugs entering our country at an all time high. Illegals invading the USA at an all time high. You need intelligence to see this not closing your eyes and pretending it isn't happening. You would have to be a fool to disagree but like I said previously there are some communist brainwashed fools here that will dispute the truth.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2820905]LOL. Who are the numbskull journalists in that 4% whose job it is to actually follow, research, observe, know and report the mechanics of a complex national economy, national security, etc and the current as well as historical results of such yet still give donations to Repubs anyway? And to Trump of all Repub grifters and clowns!

I mean, it is understandable that they spin headlines and stories to lift Repub policy results to at least look vaguely within a "Bothsider / Neithersider" shot of keeping the horse race neck in neck to the finish. Their business model requires it.

But with their family, friends and neighbors' jobs, home values, household wealth and security on the line re those Repub donations?

I guess it takes all kinds. LOL.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2820942]I actually donated to Hillary's campaign in 2016. I wish she'd won. Republicans would have done much better in the 2020 election if Hillary had been president. People vote based on the state of the economy, and the economy was going to suck regardless of who was president during the COVID pandemic. Also the Republican Party cannot do well in elections as long as Trump is its figurehead.

With more Republicans in Congress, there would have been no American Rescue Plan, which kickstarted inflation. And which when combined with other legislation, all passed by a Democrat President and Congress, will result in 5 trillion in additional unfunded spending. It's the bankrupting of America.

Hillary might just have turned out like Bill Clinton in his second term, that is, willing to work with Republicans for the good of all Americans, instead of being willing to work with far left progressives like Elizabeth Warren for the benefit of no one except special interests, like renewable energy companies, chip manufacturers and contractors. That's what Biden's doing. Remember that the last time we balanced the budget was under Bill Clinton and a Republican House.[/QUOTE]The proper characterization is "Trump's Pandemic".

No way in hell would a President Hillary Clinton have been so stupid, foolish, beholden to and worried about making China's Xi the least bit uncomfortable during a losing "trade negotiation" that she would have defunded and removed the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents from China whose very job it was to monitor such potential developments in a known "bad actor" country, to alert the world of emerging coronavirus cases and more 5 months before those first cases emerged when only a 2-3 month heads up would have been plenty of time to avert and avoid all of the problems that caused, the worldwide economic collapse, the millions of deaths, the millions upon millions of job losses, the school and business closures, the need for an American Rescue Plan to recover us and the rest of the planet from still another Great Repub Depression / Recession in the first place, any and all resulting inflation, Fed Funds Rate increases, all of it.

And certainly not against all expert dire warnings not to do something so dangerous and stupid no matter how flattering it was to the ego of his losing "trade negotiation" victor Xi, as Trump did.

And then to lie about it, mock and denigrate the known mitigating measures, including any need for anyone to bother inventing a vaccine for what he'd wrought throughout all of critical Trump's Pandemic development year 2020? LOL. Seriously, nether Hillary Clinton nor any other Dem would have done that.

But Trump did it. And all evidence supports the idea that virtually any and all Repubs would have done exactly what Trump did. Happily so. Word is defunding vaccine study and development for future coronavirus challenges is in the Repub demands to stop them from defaulting on their debts and close down the USA government again! Just as Nude Grinbitch and his Repubs did twice under Clinton in order to try but failed to crash the historic economic expansion, jobs creation and producing a budget surplus that Clinton and his Dem Congress set in legislative motion without a single Repub vote for it in 1993.

LOL. That is just silly fantasizing of a move and outcome under a Hillary Clinton presidency that a clear majority of 2016 voters knew quite well would never have happened under her stewardship.

Thought some of you might like this.
[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-JovAbHqDc[/URL]

There is an interesting proposal here for affirmative action, but based on family income / parenthood etc, not on race.

When you can do something? This is why I advocate for lowering centres of power to the local level.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQN17Niu9TM[/URL]

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2820977]Haven't been on this thread for months as common sense tells you that you can't argue with stupidity. It doesn't take much research to see how Biden has destroyed the USA. It doesn't take research to see how Biden has destroyed the economy and driven inflation to 40 year highs. It doesn't take research to see how knumbskulls still support open and dangerous borders, crime ridden cities, woke politics. Large corporations like Target and Budweiser have learned the hard way how wokeness can piss off loyal hard working customers. Stupid liberal democrats still support the destruction of America and still votes for socialists communist ways in their cities making them the most dangerous places to live. Nordstrom closing their stores in downtown SF because unsafe for employees to go to work. Watch all the stupid people get conned again in our state by offering reparations to blacks. These communist leaders know they won't ever pay that but they will dangle it out to the stupid that will believe and vote them in again. 88% of the people in the USA think the USA is headed in the wrong direction. Poverty at an all time high. Homelessness at an all time high, Crime at an all time high. Inflation at an all time high. Drugs entering our country at an all time high. Illegals invading the USA at an all time high. You need intelligence to see this not closing your eyes and pretending it isn't happening. You would have to be a fool to disagree but like I said previously there are some communist brainwashed fools here that will dispute the truth.[/QUOTE]. For managing to squeeze one "socialist" and three "communists" in a short yet gloriously incoherent post. Good job!

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2821064]The proper characterization is "Trump's Pandemic".

No way in hell would a President Hillary Clinton have been so stupid, foolish, beholden to and worried about making China's Xi the least bit uncomfortable during a losing "trade negotiation" that she would have defunded and removed the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents from China whose very job it was to monitor such potential developments in a known "bad actor" country, to alert the world of emerging coronavirus cases and more 5 months before those first cases emerged when only a 2-3 month heads up would have been plenty of time to avert and avoid all of the problems that caused, the worldwide economic collapse, the millions of deaths, the millions upon millions of job losses, the school and business closures, the need for an American Rescue Plan to recover us and the rest of the planet from still another Great Repub Depression / Recession in the first place, any and all resulting inflation, Fed Funds Rate increases, all of it.

And certainly not against all expert dire warnings not to do something so dangerous and stupid no matter how flattering it was to the ego of his losing "trade negotiation" victor Xi, as Trump did.

And then to lie about it, mock and denigrate the known mitigating measures, including any need for anyone to bother inventing a vaccine for what he'd wrought throughout all of critical Trump's Pandemic development year 2020? LOL. Seriously, nether Hillary Clinton nor any other Dem would have done that.

But Trump did it. And all evidence supports the idea that virtually any and all Repubs would have done exactly what Trump did. Happily so. Word is defunding vaccine study and development for future coronavirus challenges is in the Repub demands to stop them from defaulting on their debts and close down the USA government again! Just as Nude Grinbitch and his Repubs did twice under Clinton in order to try but failed to crash the historic economic expansion, jobs creation and producing a budget surplus that Clinton and his Dem Congress set in legislative motion without a single Repub vote for it in 1993.

LOL. That is just silly fantasizing of a move and outcome under a Hillary Clinton presidency that a clear majority of 2016 voters knew quite well would never have happened under her stewardship.[/QUOTE]I started to read your post, "No way in hell would a President Hillary Clinton have been so stupid, foolish, beholden to and worried about making China's Xi the least bit uncomfortable during a losing "trade negotiation. " I thought for once Tooms and I are on the same page. He's going to criticize Trump's trade wars. His poorly thought out tariffs on China, and on steel and other imports from other countries. But no.

Your post makes no sense. China was dead set on hiding the pandemic from its own people, let alone the USA, the WHO, and the rest of the world. The budget for the CDC remained stable and the budget for the NIH increased during the Trump administration -- see the chart here. The numbers are adjusted for inflation.

[URL]https://www.cato.org/blog/coronavirus-nih/cdc-funding[/URL]

Most likely any cuts by the CDC in Beijing were determined internally, not by Trump political operatives.

Yes, as a result of a bad decision by neocon warmonger John Bolton, there were cuts at the NSC related to pandemic preparedness. But would they have made any difference given the Chinese government's secrecy? Very, very doubtful.

Another consideration is the infectiousness of COVID 19, the Ro value. It was much more infectious than MERS, SARS and even the flu. Even with much more foreknowledge, it would have been hard to prevent the pandemic.

Please point to links from unbiased sources that show a majority of Republicans are trying to defund vaccine studies.

I agree that Trump should not have mocked social distancing or masks. On the other hand, it's ridiculous to say he didn't support a vaccine. Not only is Operation Warp Speed lauded by Fauci, Redfield and many other public health experts, but Trump was more willing to push the vaccines through the FDA than most. Admittedly this was partly because he wanted the vaccines out before the 2020 election. But the end result was that many American lives, and lives of people around the world, were saved. A president Clinton or Biden might just have allowed the FDA to proceed at its normal snail's pace.

Yes the USA suffered more than most developed countries during the pandemic. The primary culprits were normal Americans, who weren't going to social distance, wear masks, or get vaccinated. Now more of those people may be Republicans, and you might not like it, put there's not much you or politicians can do about it, short of moving. It's a free country. And there were economic downsides to responding like, say, Thailand.

BTW, the USA arguably was better prepared for a pandemic at the end of the George W. Bush administration than it was at the end of Obama's. Bush was a Republican.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2821101]When you can do something? This is why I advocate for lowering centres of power to the local level.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQN17Niu9TM[/URL][/QUOTE]There are probably more good things than bad that Minnesota did, that are described in the video. I agree with you about delegating power to the local level, but don't see how the video advocates it. Those actions are being taken at the state level. To the extent though that they're being done in St. Paul (capitol of Minnesota) instead of Washington, D.C., I agree.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2820977]Haven't been on this thread for months as common sense tells you that you can't argue with stupidity. It doesn't take much research to see how Biden has destroyed the USA. It doesn't take research to see how Biden has destroyed the economy and driven inflation to 40 year highs. It doesn't take research to see how knumbskulls still support open and dangerous borders, crime ridden cities, woke politics. Large corporations like Target and Budweiser have learned the hard way how wokeness can piss off loyal hard working customers. Stupid liberal democrats still support the destruction of America and still votes for socialists communist ways in their cities making them the most dangerous places to live. Nordstrom closing their stores in downtown SF because unsafe for employees to go to work. Watch all the stupid people get conned again in our state by offering reparations to blacks. These communist leaders know they won't ever pay that but they will dangle it out to the stupid that will believe and vote them in again. 88% of the people in the USA think the USA is headed in the wrong direction. Poverty at an all time high. Homelessness at an all time high, Crime at an all time high. Inflation at an all time high. Drugs entering our country at an all time high. Illegals invading the USA at an all time high. You need intelligence to see this not closing your eyes and pretending it isn't happening. You would have to be a fool to disagree but like I said previously there are some communist brainwashed fools here that will dispute the truth.[/QUOTE]Tooms is smart. He's just so blinded by partisanship that he doesn't realize the Biden Big Government agenda over the long term would take us where France is now. We'd be about 30% poorer than we would be without it.

As to the rest, I’d be pissed off too if I lived in California instead of Texas. Or actually I would have moved by now.

[QUOTE=Xpartan;2821110]. For managing to squeeze one "socialist" and three "communists" in a short yet gloriously incoherent post. Good job![/QUOTE]Just sticking to the facts. Supporters of Biden socialistic and communist policies should be proud to be called socialists and communists. Why aren't you?

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2821254]Just sticking to the facts. Supporters of Biden socialistic and communist policies should be proud to be called socialists and communists. Why aren't you?[/QUOTE]You have absolutely no idea about what socialism and communism really are. You're just repeating the drivel you read in your "hot sheets".

That makes you a parrot. Parrots, you know, may sound like they understand what they're blabbering, but they do not. It's all about air vibration and mimicking.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2821206]I started to read your post, "No way in hell would a President Hillary Clinton have been so stupid, foolish, beholden to and worried about making China's Xi the least bit uncomfortable during a losing "trade negotiation. " I thought for once Tooms and I are on the same page. He's going to criticize Trump's trade wars. His poorly thought out tariffs on China, and on steel and other imports from other countries. But no.

Your post makes no sense. China was dead set on hiding the pandemic from its own people, let alone the USA, the WHO, and the rest of the world. The budget for the CDC remained stable and the budget for the NIH increased during the Trump administration -- see the chart here. The numbers are adjusted for inflation.

[URL]https://www.cato.org/blog/coronavirus-nih/cdc-funding[/URL]

Most likely any cuts by the CDC in Beijing were determined internally, not by Trump political operatives.

Yes, as a result of a bad decision by neocon warmonger John Bolton, there were cuts at the NSC related to pandemic preparedness. But would they have made any difference given the Chinese government's secrecy? Very, very doubtful.

Another consideration is the infectiousness of COVID 19, the Ro value. It was much more infectious than MERS, SARS and even the flu. Even with much more foreknowledge, it would have been hard to prevent the pandemic.

[b]Please point to links from unbiased sources that show a majority of Republicans are trying to defund vaccine studies.[/b]

I agree that Trump should not have mocked social distancing or masks. On the other hand, it's ridiculous to say he didn't support a vaccine. Not only is Operation Warp Speed lauded by Fauci, Redfield and many other public health experts, but Trump was more willing to push the vaccines through the FDA than most. Admittedly this was partly because he wanted the vaccines out before the 2020 election. But the end result was that many American lives, and lives of people around the world, were saved. A president Clinton or Biden might just have allowed the FDA to proceed at its normal snail's pace.

Yes the USA suffered more than most developed countries during the pandemic. The primary culprits were normal Americans, who weren't going to social distance, wear masks, or get vaccinated. Now more of those people may be Republicans, and you might not like it, put there's not much you or politicians can do about it, short of moving. It's a free country. And there were economic downsides to responding like, say, Thailand.

BTW, the USA arguably was better prepared for a pandemic at the end of the George W. Bush administration than it was at the end of Obama's. Bush was a Republican.[/QUOTE]Not just an unbiased source, but a demonstrably pro Repub source, The New York Times, as evidenced even here by their crediting the rapid vaccine approval programs developed under Obama to Trump! LOL. Yeah, Trump, the guy who spent most of critical Trump's Pandemic Development year 2020 telling the world his pandemic virus was disappearing, going away without a vaccine, was always only a Dem hoax anyway so there is certainly no reason for anyone to bother wasting the time, money and effort to invent a vaccine for it.

You know, the vaccine he was so ashamed to finally admit was needed after all that he and Melania got their life-saving shots in near total secrecy and he only dared to mention it to the lamebrain mob he tried so long and hard to successfully convince otherwise whenever he felt like getting roundly booed by them at his rallies. LOL.

[B]White House Pushes to Save Key Covid Programs in Debt Ceiling Talks.
The Biden administration has prioritized preserving a $5 billion vaccine development program in discussions with House Republicans on clawing back unspent Covid-19 funds.[/B]

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/23/us/politics/biden-debt-ceiling-covid.html[/URL]

[QUOTE]Some White House officials view the vaccine development program, called Project NextGen, as the most important Covid measure to protect in the debt ceiling talks. It is loosely modeled on the Trump administrations vaccine development program, known as Operation Warp Speed, which marshaled a series of effective shots to Americans in record time.[/QUOTE]So you do take Trump to task for developing Trump's Pandemic by mocking the known mitigation measures but put your head in the sand over how he clearly laid the foundation for any significant potential pandemic emerging from China, who you appear to agree was known to be a "bad actor" on admitting leaks, flubs and infections in these matters, when he defunded and removed the very agents whose job it was monitor and report the earliest emergence of cases 5 months before those first cases emerged when only a 2-3 month heads up would have been plenty of time for responsible actors in the world to Flatten The Curve of infections and required hospitalizations so as to delay the broader spread until vaccines were invented, tested, up, running and available around the world. In other words, averting the worldwide catastrophic damage done by Trump's Pandemic.

Really, you don't need me to again, again and again here post the links to the reports connecting those two huge dots from Trump removing those agents in July 2019 to Trump explaining that a mere 2 month heads up would have averted the whole damn thing, do you?

I assure you if Obama, Biden or a hypothetical President Hillary Clinton had done such a thing in July 2019, five months before the first cases emerged in China, The New York Times would be repeating it and quoting every Repub on the planet also repeating it, daily, and ten times more all through every election cycle since July, 2019.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2821252]Tooms is smart. He's just so blinded by partisanship that he doesn't realize the Biden Big Government agenda over the long term would take us where France is now. We'd be about 30% poorer than we would be without it.

As to the rest, Id be pissed off too if I lived in California instead of Texas. Or actually I would have moved by now.[/QUOTE]Tiny, Great Repub Depression / Recession and Great Repub Jobs Destruction-producing Repubs have been warning us about the grave dangers of Great Dem Recovery, Great Dem Economic Expansions and Historic Dem Jobs Creation due to the "Big Government" intervention always required to pull us out of those Repub disasters since at least late 1932.

At some point presumably when MAGAs judged America to have been "great."

Now, really, just how long is the "long term" when this horrible outcome is supposed to happen? Something at least a bit more horrible that is than the Great Repub Depression, Eisenhower's Triple Repub Recession / Atrocious Jobs Creation record, Reagan's Great Repub Recession, GWB's Great Repub Recession that left us unprepared to effectively deal with damn near any emergency and with the economy crashing down around our ears on all fronts in January, 2009 who needs a pandemic to do it, and Trump's Great Repub Massive Jobs Destruction By The Millions Upon Millions?

Thank god I had California rental property to see me through that last one without so much as a glitch in my fucking and getting sucked by adorable Thai sweeties in their 20's routine in my hard work and FDR, Carter, Clinton, Obama, Biden Stewardship-facilitated comfy and secure retirement.

We're talking in circles. However, I am compelled to respond to one of your points.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2821387]Not just an unbiased source, but a demonstrably pro Repub source, The New York Times[/QUOTE]Haha! You literally had me laughing out loud with that one. The New York Times has endorsed the Democratic candidate for the presidency in every election since 1960. That's 60 years.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_election_endorsements_made_by_The_New_York_Times#text=Since%20 its%20 founding%20 in%201851,for%20 Joe%20 Biden%20 in%202020[/URL].

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2821387][B]White House Pushes to Save Key Covid Programs in Debt Ceiling Talks.
The Biden administration has prioritized preserving a $5 billion vaccine development program in discussions with House Republicans on clawing back unspent Covid-19 funds.[/B]

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/23/us/politics/biden-debt-ceiling-covid.html[/URL][/QUOTE]I read that article several days ago. You may recall I subscribed to the NYT so I could read your links. There's no statement in the article that Republicans are specifically trying to cut the vaccine development program, only that Republicans are trying to claw back unspent funds from COVID-19 legislation. That's a good idea. The national debt is out of control, thanks in no small part to $5 trillion in unfunded spending legislated by Democrats when they controlled the Presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022.

Linking the Republican's attempted claw back to the vaccine program is Biden Administration propaganda.

I believe the $5 billion or whatever for Project NextGen would be well spent by the way. Given our experience with COVID-19, SARS and MERS, not to mention the common cold, we need a universal coronavirus vaccine. We don't want another coronavirus pandemic killing millions of people. And then there's the effect on the economy and the national debt. Bipartisan and later Democratic Party COVID stimulus and pandemic relief is a large part of the reason federal debt held by the public rose from 17.3 trillion to 24.7 trillion in three short years.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2821398]We're talking in circles. However, I am compelled to respond to one of your points.

Haha! You literally had me laughing out loud with that one. The New York Times has endorsed the Democratic candidate for the presidency in every election since 1960. That's 60 years.

[URL]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_election_endorsements_made_by_The_New_York_Times#text=Since%20 its%20 founding%20 in%201851,for%20 Joe%20 Biden%20 in%202020[/URL].

I read that article several days ago. You may recall I subscribed to the NYT so I could read your links. There's no statement in the article that Republicans are specifically trying to cut the vaccine development program, only that Republicans are trying to claw back unspent funds from COVID-19 legislation. That's a good idea. The national debt is out of control, thanks in no small part to $5 trillion in unfunded spending legislated by Democrats when they controlled the Presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022..[/QUOTE]Endorsement Enhorsement. The NYT editors don't want to look like complete imbicles by endorsing a Repub. So what. Llke most MSM they spend the entire election cycle goofing "Democrats in Disarray"! "Trump and the Repubs Should Campaign On That Weird Perception We in MSM Promote That Repubs Are Better at Handling the Economy Than Dems"! "Hillary Can't Be Trusted"! "Biden failed to Accomplish Everything Libs Wanted"! "Repubs Just Know How To Speak 'American'" and all that crap.

No matter how you spin it and what Bizarro World math you use, cutting $5 Billion from funds earmarked for future coronavirus vaccine research and development, a drop in the ocean relative to the massive deficit spending Trump and his Repubs racked up with virtually zero to show for it, is Repub cowtowing to lunatic anti-vaxxers in their base. And if they get their way as Trump got his way when he pulled out the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents from China in 2019, no doubt sooner rather than later expect the same Million+ American Deaths, Economic Disaster, Closures, Millions Upon Millions of Jobs Wiped Out Followed by the Inevitable Inflation During the Recovery that Trump produced.

Otherwise known as Repub USA Economic and National Security Nirvana.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2821416]No matter how you spin it and what Bizarro World math you use, cutting $5 Billion from funds earmarked for future coronavirus vaccine research and development, a drop in the ocean relative to the massive deficit spending [b]Biden and his Dems racked up in 2021 and 2022[/b] with virtually zero to show for it[/QUOTE]With the slight change I made to your wording, highlighted in bold print, I agree 100%! Five billion dollars is only 1/10th of 1% of the $5 trillion in unfunded spending in bills passed by Democrats when they controlled the Presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022. And the world needs a universal coronavirus vaccine.

Please note that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats controlled the House of Representatives in 2020, and budget bills originate in the House. However I will not hang the responsibility for the 2020 deficit entirely on Nancy. We had a pandemic and the people needed help. Also Trump and Senate Republicans had their say in legislation as well. On the other hand, the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan (ARP) passed in 2021, when we'd already recovered from the 2020 recession, mainly served to ignite inflation in the USA before other countries. The $1.9 Trillion ARP contributed mightily to our $2.8 trillion (12.5% of GDP!) deficit in 2021. It was passed without a single Republican vote.

The rest of your post sounds a bit like a Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O'Donnell monologue.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2821254]Just sticking to the facts. Supporters of Biden socialistic and communist policies should be proud to be called socialists and communists. Why aren't you?[/QUOTE]So that everybody is on the same page, why don't you do the following:

1. Post [B]your[/B] definitions of both "socialism" and "communism".

2. Post all of the actual policies implemented by localities (counties, states, etc) in the USA that correspond to your definitions.

As a matter of comparison, here's the definition of both terms as found in the Oxford Leaner's Dictionary:

[B]Socialism[/B] - "a set of political and economic theories based on the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country's wealth and that the government should own and control the main industries".

Another definition of both terms found in Merriam Webster:

[B]Socialism[/B] - (1) any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods; (2) a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property; be: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.

[B]Communism[/B] - a: a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed; be: a theory advocating elimination of private property.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2821842]With the slight change I made to your wording, highlighted in bold print, I agree 100%! Five billion dollars is only 1/10th of 1% of the $5 trillion in unfunded spending in bills passed by Democrats when they controlled the Presidency, House and Senate in 2021 and 2022. And the world needs a universal coronavirus vaccine.

Please note that Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats controlled the House of Representatives in 2020, and budget bills originate in the House. However I will not hang the responsibility for the 2020 deficit entirely on Nancy. We had a pandemic and the people needed help. Also Trump and Senate Republicans had their say in legislation as well. On the other hand, the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan (ARP) passed in 2021, when we'd already recovered from the 2020 recession, mainly served to ignite inflation in the USA before other countries. The $1.9 Trillion ARP contributed mightily to our $2.8 trillion (12.5% of GDP!) deficit in 2021. It was passed without a single Republican vote.

The rest of your post sounds a bit like a Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O'Donnell monologue.[/QUOTE]If only we hadn't been hit with that totally unexpected, unwarned about, inexplicaple, unpreventable, no better response possible, mystical, magical, out of nowhere Trump's Pandemic in 2020 after Dear Leader had done everything a good leader and steward of our economy and national security could ever be expected to do in 2018,2019 and all through 2020 to prepare, prevent and respond to it so those Evil Dems wouldn't have needed to so much as give a passing thought to America spending a dime to clean up that historically colossal mess, right?

Lololol.

Go ahead, change the word "Trump's" to "Biden's" or even "Pelosi's", "Maddow's" or "O'Donnell's" if it makes you feel warm and cozy inside to do so. LOL.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2821884]

Go ahead, change the word "Biden's" to "Trump's" or even "Hawley's", "Carlson's" or "Ingraham's" if it makes you feel warm and cozy inside to do so. LOL.[/QUOTE]Damn that felt good!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822072]Damn that felt good![/QUOTE]I see the House Repubs are screaming Bloody Mass Murder to be allowed to once again cut funding and render totally MIA any and all Pandemic Prevention, Response and now VACCINE duties for the very next inevitable potential Trump's / Repub's Pandemic with, god willing in the prayers of every Repub, all the same millions of deaths, worldwide economic and supply-chain collapse, the massive jobs destruction, the business and school closures, the overwhelmed hospitals and, naturally, as much recovery-related Inflation as is mathmatically possible.

They loved the last one so much they just can't wait to bless the world with another one ASAP!

As of this moment, Biden has managed to keep the Repubs from cutting that funding and producing those same Repub Trump Presidency results. But they are desperately pulling all the stops to give us Trump's Pandemic, The Sequel and the sooner the better for them.

We will know if the Repubs get their way on that and any other typical and classic Repub Economic Disaster they can swing in the fullness of time.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822127]I see the House Repubs are screaming Bloody Mass Murder to be allowed to once again cut funding and render totally MIA any and all Pandemic Prevention, Response and now VACCINE duties for the very next inevitable potential Trump's / Repub's Pandemic with, god willing in the prayers of every Repub, all the same millions of deaths, worldwide economic and supply-chain collapse, the massive jobs destruction, the business and school closures, the overwhelmed hospitals and, naturally, as much recovery-related Inflation as is mathmatically possible.

They loved the last one so much they just can't wait to bless the world with another one ASAP!

As of this moment, Biden has managed to keep the Repubs from cutting that funding and producing those same Repub Trump Presidency results. But they are desperately pulling all the stops to give us Trump's Pandemic, The Sequel and the sooner the better for them.

We will know if the Repubs get their way on that and any other typical and classic Repub Economic Disaster they can swing in the fullness of time.[/QUOTE]Links please? I'm reading that the $5 billion in funding to develop next-generation coronavirus vaccines and treatments will be left untouched. And I don't see anything that mentions it was a point of contention, other than the White House propaganda in the NYT piece you linked to.

Again, I'm a big believer in pandemic prevention and preparation. So you might just be able to dig up some dirt on Republicans and pandemic preparedness that I'd relate to.

BTW I don't "belove" any politicians except Gary Johnson. And he's an ex-politician. Oh yeah, I belove Ronald Reagan too. But he's dead.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2821846]So that everybody is on the same page, why don't you do the following:

1. Post [B]your[/B] definitions of both "socialism" and "communism".

2. Post all of the actual policies implemented by localities (counties, states, etc) in the USA that correspond to your definitions.

As a matter of comparison, here's the definition of both terms as found in the Oxford Leaner's Dictionary:

[B]Socialism[/B] - "a set of political and economic theories based on the belief that everyone has an equal right to a share of a country's wealth and that the government should own and control the main industries".

Another definition of both terms found in Merriam Webster:

[B]Socialism[/B] - (1) any of various egalitarian economic and political theories or movements advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods; (2) a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property; be: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.

[B]Communism[/B] - a: a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed; be: a theory advocating elimination of private property.[/QUOTE]Thank you for clarifying Biden's policies. Yes your definitions of communism and socialism describe Biden policy to try to make Americans lives as good as Venezuela, Iran, Russia. At least you finally agree with me that Biden policy is socialism and communism. Thank you.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822233][b]Links please? I'm reading that the $5 billion in funding to develop next-generation coronavirus vaccines and treatments will be left untouched. And I don't see anything that mentions it was a point of contention, other than the White House propaganda in the NYT piece you linked to.[/b]

Again, I'm a big believer in pandemic prevention and preparation. So you might just be able to dig up some dirt on Republicans and pandemic preparedness that I'd relate to.

BTW I don't "belove" any politicians except Gary Johnson. And he's an ex-politician.[/QUOTE]Then clearly you are reading and hearing the same links I have seen and heard for exactly what I said about Biden managing to keep it in his deal.

But you have not seen or read anything about your Repubs crying Bloody Mass Murder in opposition the whole DEAL, which, naturally, would include the $5 Billion for vaccine study and development?

Well, that is True Blind Love for ya'.

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-gop-hardliners-trash-debt-limit-bill-party-leaders-try-shore-vot-rcna86687[/URL]

Even GOP Senators are getting in on the trashing:

[URL]https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate/gop-senators-trash-debt-limit-deal[/URL]

Oh, and here is pro-Repub, Dem-hating, more stuttering, more stammering, more awkward senior moment pauses and less coherent communicator than Joe Biden, Elon Musk's business disaster Twitter' chiming in on it:

[URL]https://twitter.com/dcexaminer/status/1663035449474965504[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822241]Then clearly you are reading and hearing the same links I have seen and heard for exactly what I said about Biden managing to keep it in his deal.

But you have not seen or read anything about your Repubs crying Bloody Mass Murder in opposition the whole DEAL, which, naturally, would include the $5 Billion for vaccine study and development?

Well, that is True Blind Love for ya'.

[URL]https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-gop-hardliners-trash-debt-limit-bill-party-leaders-try-shore-vot-rcna86687[/URL]

Even GOP Senators are getting in on the trashing:

[URL]https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senate/gop-senators-trash-debt-limit-deal[/URL]

Oh, and here is pro-Repub, Dem-hating, more stuttering, more stammering, more awkward senior moment pauses and less coherent communicator than Joe Biden, Elon Musk's business disaster Twitter' chiming in on it:

[URL]https://twitter.com/dcexaminer/status/1663035449474965504[/URL][/QUOTE]I'm not seeing anywhere in those links where the $5 billion for coronavirus vaccines is a point of contention.

I saw two estimates in the New York Times of the savings over 10 years from the proposed bill. One was around 650 billion and the second around 850 billion. During 2021 and 2022, when Democrats controlled the presidency, House and Senate, they passed legislation with additional spending of $5 trillion, mainly the inflation igniting American Rescue Plan, the ridiculously-named Inflation Reduction Plan, and the pork laden Infrastructure and chips bills. Essentially they took 6 steps towards a nightmarish hell, towards the bankrupting of America through an eternally expanding national debt. And then the Republicans made them take one step back from that hell with the debt ceiling legislation.

Or at least that's what they hope to do. From your link Progressive Democrats are privately raising bloody hell because people 50 to 55 without children at home will have to work or attend job training to collect food stamps. They're also upset that the Biden Administration will have to follow through on its earlier commitment to Democrat Joe Manchin to allow a clean-burning-natural-gas pipeline to be built from Virginia to West Virginia. And that the Biden administration will have to stop preventing construction of facilities and infrastructure for renewable and conventional energy.

I just don't understand those progressives. If they want to go back to the horse and buggy in California and New York, let them. But don't impose your values on the rest of us.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822353]I'm not seeing anywhere in those links where the $5 billion for coronavirus vaccines is a point of contention.

I saw two estimates in the New York Times of the savings over 10 years from the proposed bill. One was around 650 billion and the second around 850 billion. During 2021 and 2022, when Democrats controlled the presidency, House and Senate, they passed legislation with additional spending of $5 trillion, mainly the inflation igniting American Rescue Plan, the ridiculously-named Inflation Reduction Plan, and the pork laden Infrastructure and chips bills. Essentially they took 6 steps towards a nightmarish hell, towards the bankrupting of America through an eternally expanding national debt. And then the Republicans made them take one step back from that hell with the debt ceiling legislation.

Or at least that's what they hope to do. From your link Progressive Democrats are privately raising bloody hell because people 50 to 55 without children at home will have to work or attend job training to collect food stamps. They're also upset that the Biden Administration will have to follow through on its earlier commitment to Democrat Joe Manchin to allow a clean-burning-natural-gas pipeline to be built from Virginia to West Virginia. And that the Biden administration will have to stop preventing construction of facilities and infrastructure for renewable and conventional energy.

I just don't understand those progressives. If they want to go back to the horse and buggy in California and New York, let them. But don't impose your values on the rest of us.[/QUOTE]Which bite of a Repub-characterized "turd sandwich" is the sticking point for not eating it? If they are screetching about objecting to all of the deal, everything is a sticking point.

Additionally, the undisputed absolute Leader of the Repub Party is on record ordering all Repubs in Congress to default, unless:

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2023/05/11/trump-says-gop-should-let-debt-default-happen-if-democrats-dont-agree-to-spending-cuts/[/URL]

[QUOTE]Commenting on the battle over raising of the debt ceiling at CNNs Town Hall event, Trump directly addressed Republican lawmakers in Congress and told them if Democrats dont give you [b]massive cuts[/b], youre going to have to do a default.[/QUOTE]Did the Dems give them "massive cuts" in that deal?

All indications by CBO and others is that "winning" Repub demand will cost more money, not cut anything much less make "massive" cuts, and puts more Americans on the food stamp program. No surprise:

[B]Changes to food aid in debt bill would cost money, far from savings Republicans envisioned.
An estimate from the Congressional Budget Office says that while the new work requirements in SNAP would save money, the added benefits pushed by Democrats would cost more and add almost 80,000 people to the rolls in an average month.[/B]

[URL]https://www.pressherald.com/2023/05/31/changes-to-food-aid-in-debt-bill-would-cost-money-far-from-savings-republicans-envisioned/[/URL]

Maybe that is what the Progressive Dems were trying to prevent th Repubs from doing.

In addition to once again working brilliantly and masterfully to (likely) rescue America and the rest of the world from still another typical Horrific Repub Economic Collapse, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Joe Biden was WAY ahead of the curve on when and how to bring important supply-chains and jobs back to America, particularly with regard to his Pro Repub Numbskulls-bewildering Inflation Reduction Act:

[B]Firms are bringing production home thanks to war, China's slowdown and TikTok [/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/01/reshoring-more-domestic-manufacturing-due-to-supply-chain-disruption.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL]

It turns out Trump's passionate and determined deep throat blowing of Xi, Kim and Putin while sneakily helping them to overthrow Democracy at home and around the world in favor of Socialism and Communism wasn't the way to MAGA after all. LOL. Not that there is one iota of evidence that was ever Trump's or any Repub's goal anyway, of course.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822633]In addition to once again working brilliantly and masterfully to (likely) rescue America and the rest of the world from still another typical Horrific Repub Economic Collapse, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Joe Biden was WAY ahead of the curve on when and how to bring important supply-chains and jobs back to America, particularly with regard to his Pro Repub Numbskulls-bewildering Inflation Reduction Act:

[B]Firms are bringing production home thanks to war, China's slowdown and TikTok [/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/01/reshoring-more-domestic-manufacturing-due-to-supply-chain-disruption.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL]

It turns out Trump's passionate and determined deep throat blowing of Xi, Kim and Putin while sneakily helping them to overthrow Democracy at home and around the world in favor of Socialism and Communism wasn't the way to MAGA after all. LOL. Not that there is one iota of evidence that was ever Trump's or any Repub's goal anyway, of course.[/QUOTE]Thanks Joe for being the worst president in history for economic growth and business. I just returned from the Wealth Management conference in Atlanta and consensus of the biggest financial companies in the USA is that the market and business has had the slowest growth since the great depression in the 1030,s. Dow hit an all time high of 36,000 three to four months after Biden took office basically from the strong economic policies of the Trump administration. It took Biden destructive policies about 3 months from his taking office to send the market into a tailspin. Basically Dow is down 12% under Biden policies making his economy the worst in 75 years. Usually in bad years investors and retirees see their portfolios increase at least 4% per year and many people live off that fixed income. 401 K values have been devastated. General consensus from the conference is just weather the storm. We still have 18 months of the worst presidency in history and our industry is like every other industry in the USA now. Suffering from Biden stupidity and incompetence. Yes thanks Joe for ruining the lives of millions of Americans.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822572]Which bite of a Repub-characterized "turd sandwich" is the sticking point for not eating it? If they are screetching about objecting to all of the deal, everything is a sticking point.[/QUOTE]Please be more coherent.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822572]Additionally, the undisputed absolute Leader of the Repub Party is on record ordering all Repubs in Congress to default, unless:

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/siladityaray/2023/05/11/trump-says-gop-should-let-debt-default-happen-if-democrats-dont-agree-to-spending-cuts/[/URL][/QUOTE]Well, he's your guy. Trump is the Democrat's best friend. He's given you three elections, although the Republicans did manage to eke out a small majority in the House in 2022. Democrats gave tens of millions to support the Trumpiest of the pro Trump candidates in 2022.

[URL]https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/07/democrats-spend-millions-on-republican-primaries/[/URL]

And they'll probably spend tens or hundreds of millions supporting Trump in the 2024 primaries.

And why not? Trump used to be a card carrying member of the Democratic Party. He proposed a Bernie Sanders style wealth tax. He said he had no problem with partial birth abortion. And as recently as 2017, he wanted to raise taxes on better off Americans. Gary Cohn, a Democrat and his chief economic advisor, had to talk him out of it. "Mr. President, you can't raise taxes. You're a Republican."

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822572]Did the Dems give them "massive cuts" in that deal?

All indications by CBO and others is that "winning" Repub demand will cost more money, not cut anything much less make "massive" cuts, [/QUOTE]The best unbiased estimate we have at present for the savings from the debt ceiling bill is from the Congressional Budget Office, and it's 1.5 trillion:

[URL]https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-05/hr3746_Letter_McCarthy.pdf[/URL]

That's 6.3% of GDP. Hey, every trillion helps.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822572]and puts more Americans on the food stamp program. No surprise:

[B]Changes to food aid in debt bill would cost money, far from savings Republicans envisioned.
An estimate from the Congressional Budget Office says that while the new work requirements in SNAP would save money, the added benefits pushed by Democrats would cost more and add almost 80,000 people to the rolls in an average month.[/B]

[URL]https://www.pressherald.com/2023/05/31/changes-to-food-aid-in-debt-bill-would-cost-money-far-from-savings-republicans-envisioned/[/URL]

Maybe that is what the Progressive Dems were trying to prevent th Repubs from doing.[/QUOTE]You're better than that Tooms. Yes, it would be better if aid for the poor were funded, administered and controlled at the state and local level. But given what we're stuck with, I don't see why you begrudge eliminating the work requirement for food stamps for the homeless and veterans. Many or most of the homeless are mentally ill. It's difficult for them to hold down jobs. Should we let them starve? And veterans were willing to and often did put their lives on the line for America. They deserve good treatment. I don't see Republican Congressmen begrudging that provision for the veterans. As to the homeless, those that are voting mainly with their districts and states in mind might not favor ending work requirements for the homeless. That's because homelessness is mostly a blue city and blue state problem. And while I would disagree with those Republican Congressmen, maybe they have a point. San Francisco could take some of the money it's using to tell the homeless where to get drugs and spend it on food aid for example.

[URL]https://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2023/05/08/the-whole-story-with-anderson-cooper-explores-what-happened-to-san-francisco-with-cnns-sara-sidner-on-sunday-may-14-at-8pm-et-pt/[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822633]In addition to once again working brilliantly and masterfully to (likely) rescue America and the rest of the world from still another typical Horrific Repub Economic Collapse, it is becoming increasingly apparent that Joe Biden was WAY ahead of the curve on when and how to bring important supply-chains and jobs back to America, particularly with regard to his Pro Repub Numbskulls-bewildering Inflation Reduction Act:

[B]Firms are bringing production home thanks to war, China's slowdown and TikTok [/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/01/reshoring-more-domestic-manufacturing-due-to-supply-chain-disruption.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL][/QUOTE]The most important measure to bring jobs and factories and investments back to America was the Republicans' 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), specifically, the restructuring of corporate taxation. The corporate tax rate was cut, so that America went from having the highest corporate rate in the developed world to the middle of the pack. The GILTI tax on foreign income realized by American corporations and provisions to encourage repatriation of cash from overseas were perhaps just as important. The trade deficit in goods and services decreased from 46.8 billion / month from January, 2018 when the corporate rate cut took effect to 40.5 billion / month when COVID kicked off. Similarly, the labor force participation rate increased from 62.7% in January, 2018 to 63.3% in February, 2020.

Thanks to Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, the Biden Administration was not able to raise the corporate rate. So, while the trade balance and labor force participation rate haven't rebounded to pro COVID levels, they are still improving from pandemic levels.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOPGSTB[/URL]

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART[/URL]

As to Biden's brilliant moves, what a joke. Trump's biggest fuck up was trying to steal an election. His second biggest fuck up was his trade wars, including huge tariffs on Chinese products which were borne by USA Consumers in the form of higher prices. They did nothing to move production to the USA. Instead more clothing and cheap electronics consumed in the USA are made in southeast and south Asia and Central America. Big deal. Now when Biden came to power did he remove those tariffs? No he didn't. He's just as bad as Trump. And Trump at least tried to develop a relationship with Xi. Biden, taking lessons he learned from Obama, has treated him with sanctimony and moral arrogance. Biden's going to drag us into a new cold war.

And the green subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act, which a recent Wall Street Journal Article claimed would cost $1. 1 trillion, were corporate welfare. That is pork, crony capitalism at its finest.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822633]It turns out Trump's passionate and determined deep throat blowing of Xi, Kim and Putin while sneakily helping them to overthrow Democracy at home and around the world in favor of Socialism and Communism wasn't the way to MAGA after all. LOL. Not that there is one iota of evidence that was ever Trump's or any Repub's goal anyway, of course.[/QUOTE]Well, imposing massive tariffs on China and doing his dead level best to prevent the Nordstream 2 pipeline don't exactly sound like deep throating Xi and Putin. Would there be a war in Ukraine right now if Trump were president? As to Kim, Trump probably scared the shit out of him. Kim might have figured Trump was just crazy enough to push the nuclear button and wipe him and North Korea off the Plant. Donald Trump, crazy? Or crazy like a fox?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822753][b]Please be more coherent.[/b]

Well, he's your guy. Trump is the Democrat's best friend. He's given you three elections, although the Republicans did manage to eke out a small majority in the House in 2022. Democrats gave tens of millions to support the Trumpiest of the pro Trump candidates in 2022.

[URL]https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/07/democrats-spend-millions-on-republican-primaries/[/URL]

And they'll probably spend tens or hundreds of millions supporting Trump in the 2024 primaries.

And why not? [b]Trump used to be a card carrying member of the Democratic Party.[/b] He proposed a Bernie Sanders style wealth tax. He said he had no problem with partial birth abortion. And as recently as 2017, he wanted to raise taxes on better off Americans. Gary Cohn, a Democrat and his chief economic advisor, had to talk him out of it. "Mr. President, you can't raise taxes. You're a Republican."[/QUOTE]Since you must have averted your eyes and plugged your ears to the most vocal Repub opposition to the entire deal and, yep, that would include opposing the retention of $5 billion for vaccine research and development to help avert another Repub Trump's Pandemic from spreading unabated ASAP, a simple Google Search for "turd sandwich" might have cleared up your confusion about that.

From some of Repub House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's most valued and highly-regarded Repub House members:

[B]'Turd Sandwich: MAGA Members of Congress Hate on Debt Deal.
"This is NOT a win for the American people!" Rep. Lauren.
MAY 28, 2023[/B]

[URL]https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/maga-congress-debt-ceiling-deal-1234743550/[/URL]

Oh, Reagan "used to be a Democrat" too. Then his show biz career tanked, he decided to enter politics and he knew from decades of observation that Lazy, Know Nothing, Do Nothing slackers can join the Repub Party, never be expected to produce anything other than Great Repub Depressions / Recessions and Massive Job Losses, none of the historic recoveries, expansions and gains yet still get praised for "handling the economy better than Dems" by Mainstream Media.

The same as Trump did.

Now, where do you see me begrudging the elimination of the work requirement for anyone?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822760][b]The most important measure to bring jobs and factories and investments back to America was the Republicans' 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), specifically, the restructuring of corporate taxation. The corporate tax rate was cut, so that America went from having the highest corporate rate in the developed world to the middle of the pack.[/b] The GILTI tax on foreign income realized by American corporations and provisions to encourage repatriation of cash from overseas were perhaps just as important. The trade deficit in goods and services decreased from 46.8 billion / month from January, 2018 when the corporate rate cut took effect to 40.5 billion / month when COVID kicked off. Similarly, the labor force participation rate increased from 62.7% in January, 2018 to 63.3% in February, 2020.

Thanks to Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, the Biden Administration was not able to raise the corporate rate. So, while the trade balance and labor force participation rate haven't rebounded to pro COVID levels, they are still improving from pandemic levels.[/QUOTE]LOL. That claim has been debunked many times over, even by the beneficiaries of those tax cuts!

[B]Searching for supply-side effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
July 6, 2021[/B]

[URL]https://www.brookings.edu/research/searching-for-supply-side-effects-of-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/[/URL]

[QUOTE]The TCJA provision that allowed firms to return overseas profits to the U.S. without paying U.S. tax created a one-time spike in repatriated funds. But rather than boosting investment or wages, it generated a wave of corporate stock repurchases.[/QUOTE]

Unwilling to accept the growing Winger Love for Larry Summers as a Many-Fleeting Thing, I felt it my romantic duty to post his recent pronouncement about the most conspicuous Repub "win" in the Prevent The Repubs From Crashing Worldwide Economies Again agreement:

[B]Former Treasury Secretary Summers Criticizes IRS Provisions In Debt Ceiling Agreement.
Summers opposes IRS funding cuts in debt ceiling deal, warns of future deficits and tax cheats' advantage.
May 31, 2023 [/B]

[URL]https://www.zenger.news/2023/05/31/former-treasury-secretary-summers-criticizes-irs-provisions-in-debt-ceiling-agreement/[/URL]

[QUOTE]"The rescinding of #IRS funding will raise future deficits by more than $100 billion and risks a compliance crisis and privileges rich tax cheats. I desperately hope it will not set a precedent, Summers said.
....
The economist is not the only person to sound critical of the IRS provisions. Harvard professor and noted economist Jason Furman had stated that the funding reduction is particularly galling especially since it will increase the deficit. It should not be repeated ever again, he said in his tweet.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822771]LOL. That claim has been debunked many times over, even by the beneficiaries of those tax cuts!

[B]Searching for supply-side effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
July 6, 2021[/B]

[URL]https://www.brookings.edu/research/searching-for-supply-side-effects-of-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/[/URL][/QUOTE]What do investors do with cash they receive from buybacks and dividends? They reinvest the money. In the process our economy becomes more efficient. Cash flow realized from buggy manufacturers was recycled into automobile manufacturing for example.

As to the Brookings article, they were absolutely right: "By only analyzing results through 2019, we focused only on short-term effects, which may be a poor guide to the longer run. Short-term growth dynamics typically are dominated by changes in aggregate demand while long-term growth stems from changes in supply. Both [B]experts[/B] and advocates emphasize that the supply-side process may take a significant amount of time to take full effect. ".

You don't close down an operation in Ireland for example and move it to Austin the year after a tax cut.

And indeed if you look at investing cash flows, which include capex but not investments in working capital, that's what has happened. Here are cash flows from investments (negative because you're spending money) per share for the S&P 500 going back to 2017, the year before the TCJA took effect.

2017 -141.34.

2018 -138.90.

2019 -181.10.

2020 -214.82.

2021 -221.41.

2022 -226.86.

Investments by the S&P 500 companies have increased by 60% since the TCJA took effect! Not including investments in working capital.

And corporate profits resulting from this additional investment in America are kicking in too. In fact, tax receipts on corporate income were the third highest in history in 2022!

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX[/URL]

Now those numbers aren't adjusted for inflation, but just eyeballing the graph, it looks to me like your claim that the TCJA will reduce the amount the federal government steals by 2. 5 trillion over 10 years is bogus. Total federal receipts as a % of GDP also are up, to the fourth highest level in history in 2022. All under a tax regime last modified by the TCJA.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S[/URL]

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822781]Unwilling to accept the growing Winger Love for Larry Summers as a Many-Fleeting Thing, I felt it my romantic duty to post his recent pronouncement about the most conspicuous Repub "win" in the Prevent The Repubs From Crashing Worldwide Economies Again agreement:

[B]Former Treasury Secretary Summers Criticizes IRS Provisions In Debt Ceiling Agreement.
Summers opposes IRS funding cuts in debt ceiling deal, warns of future deficits and tax cheats' advantage.
May 31, 2023 [/B]

[URL]https://www.zenger.news/2023/05/31/former-treasury-secretary-summers-criticizes-irs-provisions-in-debt-ceiling-agreement/[/URL][/QUOTE]Well, he is a Democrat, which means he instinctively wants to fuck over the entrepreneurs, businessmen and investors who drive growth in America. The Democrats legislated $80 billion in additional funding for the IRS, and now as a result of the debt ceiling agreement will have to back off of $20 billion of that.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2822763]Since you must have averted your eyes and plugged your ears to the most vocal Repub opposition to the entire deal and, yep, that would include opposing the retention of $5 billion for vaccine research and development to help avert another Repub Trump's Pandemic from spreading unabated ASAP, a simple Google Search for "turd sandwich" might have cleared up your confusion about that.

From some of Repub House Speaker Kevin McCarthy's most valued and highly-regarded Repub House members:

[B]'Turd Sandwich: MAGA Members of Congress Hate on Debt Deal.
"This is NOT a win for the American people!" Rep. Lauren.
MAY 28, 2023[/B]

[URL]https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/maga-congress-debt-ceiling-deal-1234743550/[/URL][/QUOTE]When did you become an admirer of Lauren Boebert? I'd bang her, but she's dumb as shit.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822760]The most important measure to bring jobs and factories and investments back to America was the Republicans' 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), specifically, the restructuring of corporate taxation. The corporate tax rate was cut, so that America went from having the highest corporate rate in the developed world to the middle of the pack. The GILTI tax on foreign income realized by American corporations and provisions to encourage repatriation of cash from overseas were perhaps just as important. The trade deficit in goods and services decreased from 46.8 billion / month from January, 2018 when the corporate rate cut took effect to 40.5 billion / month when COVID kicked off. Similarly, the labor force participation rate increased from 62.7% in January, 2018 to 63.3% in February, 2020.

Thanks to Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, the Biden Administration was not able to raise the corporate rate. So, while the trade balance and labor force participation rate haven't rebounded to pro COVID levels, they are still improving from pandemic levels.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/BOPGSTB[/URL]

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART[/URL]

As to Biden's brilliant moves, what a joke. Trump's biggest fuck up was trying to steal an election. His second biggest fuck up was his trade wars, including huge tariffs on Chinese products which were borne by USA Consumers in the form of higher prices. They did nothing to move production to the USA. Instead more clothing and cheap electronics consumed in the USA are made in southeast and south Asia and Central America. Big deal. Now when Biden came to power did he remove those tariffs? No he didn't. He's just as bad as Trump. And Trump at least tried to develop a relationship with Xi. Biden, taking lessons he learned from Obama, has treated him with sanctimony and moral arrogance. Biden's going to drag us into a new cold war.

And the green subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act, which a recent Wall Street Journal Article claimed would cost $1. 1 trillion, were corporate welfare. That is pork, crony capitalism at its finest.

Well, imposing massive tariffs on China and doing his dead level best to prevent the Nordstream 2 pipeline don't exactly sound like deep throating Xi and Putin. Would there be a war in Ukraine right now if Trump were president? As to Kim, Trump probably scared the shit out of him. Kim might have figured Trump was just crazy enough to push the nuclear button and wipe him and North Korea off the Plant. Donald Trump, crazy? Or crazy like a fox?[/QUOTE]So true. Great posts. The facts don't lie. Biden's incompetence will not only extend the recession he put us in but also will get us into a war. China and Russia are licking their chops with the weakest American president in history. Only a fool would dispute this. And one probably will.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2822821]What do investors do with cash they receive from buybacks and dividends? They reinvest the money. In the process our economy becomes more efficient. Cash flow realized from buggy manufacturers was recycled into automobile manufacturing for example.

As to the Brookings article, they were absolutely right: "By only analyzing results through 2019, we focused only on short-term effects, which may be a poor guide to the longer run. Short-term growth dynamics typically are dominated by changes in aggregate demand while long-term growth stems from changes in supply. Both [B]experts[/B] and advocates emphasize that the supply-side process may take a significant amount of time to take full effect. ".

You don't close down an operation in Ireland for example and move it to Austin the year after a tax cut.

And indeed if you look at investing cash flows, which include capex but not investments in working capital, that's what has happened. Here are cash flows from investments (negative because you're spending money) per share for the S&P 500 going back to 2017, the year before the TCJA took effect.

2017 -141.34.

2018 -138.90.

2019 -181.10.

2020 -214.82.

2021 -221.41.

2022 -226.86.

Investments by the S&P 500 companies have increased by 60% since the TCJA took effect! Not including investments in working capital.

And corporate profits resulting from this additional investment in America are kicking in too. In fact, tax receipts on corporate income were the third highest in history in 2022!

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX[/URL]

Now those numbers aren't adjusted for inflation, but just eyeballing the graph, it looks to me like your claim that the TCJA will reduce the amount the federal government steals by 2. 5 trillion over 10 years is bogus. Total federal receipts as a % of GDP also are up, to the fourth highest level in history in 2022. All under a tax regime last modified by the TCJA.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S[/URL][/QUOTE]Well, apparently expanding the economy and creating more jobs with them than without them is NOT what investors did with their windfall profits from Repub tax cuts in the late 1920's, the 1980's, 2001-2008 and 2018-2020.

Far, far, far from it.

Now, Dem tax policy / cuts and economic policy produce quite a different result. Because they are focused on the right people to grow the economy and create jobs at the right time; under FDR, JFK / LBJ, Carter, Clinton, Obama and Biden, for example.

I sure as hell would rather have been starting up a business venture or looking for a good job at the beginning of any Dem administration of the past 100 years than any Repub administration of the past 100 years.

Unless my business venture was setting up soup kitchens or selling apples on the street, that is.

Thanks Joe for being the worst president in history for economic growth and business. The last 2 years the market and business has had the slowest growth since the great depression. Dow hit an all time high of 36,000 three to four months after Biden took office basically from the strong economic policies of the Trump administration. It took Biden destructive policies about 3 months from his taking office to send the market into a tailspin. Basically Dow is down 10% under Biden policies making his economy the worst in 75 years. We still have 18 months of the worst presidency in history and every industry in the USA suffers from stupid regulations and policies from the progressive left idiots along with Biden stupidity and incompetence. Yes thanks Joe for ruining the lives of millions of Americans.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2822897]So true. Great posts. The facts don't lie. Biden's incompetence[b] will not only extend the recession he put us in[/b] but also will get us into a war. China and Russia are licking their chops with the weakest American president in history. Only a fool would dispute this. And one probably will.[/QUOTE]Yes, absolutely as true as that Recession Biden put us in indeed.

Lolololol.

[B]Payrolls rose 339,000 in May, much better than expected in resilient labor market[/B]

[URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/02/jobs-report-may-2023-.html?__source=androidappshare[/URL]

Dude, we're still waiting for those Great Dem Recessions under Clinton and Obama that never happened but all those pro Repub Economic Gurus and Repub Congressmen assured us they would. LOL.

Oh. Maybe you mean the mild recession Trump's Fed Chairman appointee is struggling mightily to artificially induce because there are way too many jobs being created in Biden's economy than there are applicants to accept them. The same economic "problem" we had under Carter.

For sure, that will never be an economic "problem" that job hunters, entrepreneurs, businessmen and investors will ever have to face under Repub stewardship and policies. No, under Repub stewardship and policies the economic problems are typically who the hell will buy anything from cupcakes to gasoline when jobs are being wiped out by the millions, businesses are closing in droves and Great Depressions or Great Recessions or at least serial Recessions and crap jobs creation are the norm.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2823087]Thanks Joe for being the worst president in history for economic growth and business. The last 2 years the market and business has had the slowest growth since the great depression. Dow hit an all time high of 36,000 three to four months after Biden took office basically from the strong economic policies of the Trump administration. It took Biden destructive policies about 3 months from his taking office to send the market into a tailspin. Basically Dow is down 10% under Biden policies making his economy the worst in 75 years. We still have 18 months of the worst presidency in history and every industry in the USA suffers from stupid regulations and policies from the progressive left idiots along with Biden stupidity and incompetence. Yes thanks Joe for ruining the lives of millions of Americans.[/QUOTE]You do know the stock market is not "the economy", right? LOL. What am I asking. Of course you don't know that.

Uh. The S&P 500 Index closed at its all-time high of 4793 on December 29,2021. It is currently down at a typical "Correction" level, about 10%. It has never been in a "tail spin" under Biden as it did under Trump. At worst, it closed 3-4 percentage points lower than within a normal Correction range for a few days.

It has traded within that Correction range for about 17 months, similar to its behavior under Obama in 2015 and 2016, for about the same number of months and for the same reason; When the economy has begun to show reliable signs of recovery from the horrific Crashes experienced under the previous Repub stewardship, the Fed dithers in fits and starts over how much and how fast to appropriately raise the Fed Funds Rate. And that dithering can and has gone on for 15-18 months at a time.

Wall Street is ALWAYS spooked about what to do whenever the Fed says ANYTHING about raising rates, lowering rates, leaving rates alone, good news about rates, bad news about rates, any statement or utterance by the Fed even vaguely alluding to rates by so much as 25 basis points is enough to drive brave stock market investors under their beds and shaking like frightened kittens.

That is all that's been happening with the broad stock market for the past 17 months.

Here is one for Elvis who refuses to believe USA has never done anything wrong since Iran.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVIZVa1rlGY&t=804s[/URL]

New research showing much worse death toll by USA in Cambodia. Kissinger is a mass murderer. Never convicted, lives with impunity, reparations never paid nor offered. Absolutely disgusting isn't it Elvis?

Lasts for 17 minutes.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2823139]You do know the stock market is not "the economy", right? LOL. What am I asking. Of course you don't know that.

Uh. The S&P 500 Index closed at its all-time high of 4793 on December 29,2021. It is currently down at a typical "Correction" level, about 10%. It has never been in a "tail spin" under Biden as it did under Trump. At worst, it closed 3-4 percentage points lower than within a normal Correction range for a few days.

It has traded within that Correction range for about 17 months, similar to its behavior under Obama in 2015 and 2016, for about the same number of months and for the same reason; When the economy has begun to show reliable signs of recovery from the horrific Crashes experienced under the previous Repub stewardship, the Fed dithers in fits and starts over how much and how fast to appropriately raise the Fed Funds Rate. And that dithering can and has gone on for 15-18 months at a time.

Wall Street is ALWAYS spooked about what to do whenever the Fed says ANYTHING about raising rates, lowering rates, leaving rates alone, good news about rates, bad news about rates, any statement or utterance by the Fed even vaguely alluding to rates by so much as 25 basis points is enough to drive brave stock market investors under their beds and shaking like frightened kittens.

That is all that's been happening with the broad stock market for the past 17 months.[/QUOTE]History proves that when the economy is bad or in a recession the market is stagnant. When the economy is booming like it was pre pandemic under Trump presidency it soars. Dow was at 19,804. 72 when Trump took office and was over 30,000 when he left office for over a 50% gain in 4 years. Quite an achievement with China trying to kill our economy by starting the virus. Trump policies actually drove the market to 36,000 3 months after his presidency ended before Biden executive orders took effect and killed the economy. Which is doubling in 4 years. Biden on the other hand in 2 1/2 years has managed to drive the markets down 10% and creating highest inflation ever and putting millions into poverty. I am in the financial wealth planning and I talk to investors daily. Obviously you are not a savvy investor or you would gladly go back to Trump economy. And yes Wall Street is always spooked by what the feds do and Biden's historical inflation is causing the feds to do radical things. If you remember under Trump president inflation was under control and feds lowered rates. Like it or not corporations and Americans did better under the Trump presidency. Now they are just trying to hold on until we are done with the worst presidency in the history of the USA.

[URL]https://i.pinimg.com/736x/6b/a6/0f/6ba60fc2d49a42c61bf6f7cd8f5227e3.jpg[/URL]

"A machine like this is required to move 500 tons of earth / ore which will be.

Refined into one lithium car battery. It burns 900-1000 gallons of fuel in a 12-hour shift.

Lithium is refined from ore using sulfuric acid. The proposed lithium mine at Thacker Pass, Nevada is estimated to require up to 75 semi-loads of sulfuric acid a day. ! The acid does not turn into unicorn food as AOC believes.

Refining lithium has created several EPA SUPERFUND SITES. IT IS VERY.

TOXIC TO THE ENVIRONMENT.

A battery in an electric car, let's say an average Tesla, is made of:

25 pounds of lithium.

60 pounds of nickel.

44 pounds of manganese.

30 pounds of cobalt.

200 pounds of copper.

And.

400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic, etc. Averaging 750-1,000 pounds of minerals, that had to be mined and processed.

Into a battery that merely stores electricity. Electricity which is generated by.

Oil, gas, coal, or water (and a tiny fraction of wind and solar).

That is the truth, about the lie, of "green" energy.

There's nothing green about the "Green New Deal".

You people better learn how to vote or this nonsense will continue to flow down on top of you from the throne of government upon of which you put these people.

Stop drinking the Green New Deal's sulfuric acid Kool-Aid. !

Dr. Phillip A. Fields.

University of South Alabama.

Mobile, Alabama.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2822897]So true. Great posts. [/QUOTE]Thanks Cali Guy. If you ever get tired of the Nanny State and high taxes in the Peoples Republic of California, we'd welcome you with open harms here in God's Country, also known as the Texas panhandle.

I'd weigh in on Tooms' recent posts but I've already addressed those issues at least three times. Tooms lives in a univariate world. That means he thinks economic growth and recessions are a function of only one variable, the party of the President. He doesn't consider technology, globalization, demographic changes like population growth, changes in productivity, the business cycle, Fed policy, events like the pandemic, what's happening in other countries, the make up of Congress, etc. If something like a pandemic comes along, then it's the Republican president's fault. Biden's American Rescue Plan played no part in igniting inflation here instead of other countries. Instead, it was all the Fed chiefs fault. And that's Trump's fault too, even though Jerome Powell was appointed to the Federal Reserve by Obama, and re-appointed Fed chief by Biden.

Anyway, yes, if Biden and like minded Democrats maintain control for the long term, we will suffer. Democrats like to spend money and they like big federal government. When you kick out petrostates and countries with less than a million people, the most prosperous developed countries in the world have lowest government revenues and expenditures as a % of GDP. That is, the developed countries that leave more money in the private sector, in the hands of the people and businesses, do better. If Biden as President and Bernie Sanders as Senate Budget Committee Chairman were in charge of the economy for the long term, our GDP per capita would be much lower than what it would be under Republican leadership. Now, Tooms probably realizes that, as to Sanders anyway. His response has been that Sanders isn't a Democrat, haha.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2823784]Thanks Cali Guy. If you ever get tired of the Nanny State and high taxes in the Peoples Republic of California, we'd welcome you with open harms here in God's Country, also known as the Texas panhandle.

I'd weigh in on Tooms' recent posts but I've already addressed those issues at least three times. Tooms lives in a univariate world. That means he thinks economic growth and recessions are a function of only one variable, the party of the President. He doesn't consider technology, globalization, demographic changes like population growth, changes in productivity, the business cycle, Fed policy, events like the pandemic, what's happening in other countries, the make up of Congress, etc. If something like a pandemic comes along, then it's the Republican president's fault. Biden's American Rescue Plan played no part in igniting inflation here instead of other countries. Instead, it was all the Fed chiefs fault. And that's Trump's fault too, even though Jerome Powell was appointed to the Federal Reserve by Obama, and re-appointed Fed chief by Biden..[/QUOTE]San Diego is still one of the better cities in CA as the area I live in is about 50/50 democrats and republicans. But I will retire in Texas or possible Wyoming and get out of this CA mess in about 7 years. Of course our area still has some of the progressive socialists like Bernie and Tooms. Being with a major wealth management company that is in every state I have to be pretty neutral on politics and I rarely discuss politics with the liberals but I can say that all my clients benefited greatly from the Trump presidency. Majority of my clients bought into energy oil stocks on my recommendations when Biden went to war on domestic oil and it has minimized their losses from Biden incompetence. Many Californians on fixed income are really struggling though with the high costs. Biden inflation is even worse here with Newsome policies.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2823784]Thanks Cali Guy. If you ever get tired of the Nanny State and high taxes in the Peoples Republic of California, we'd welcome you with open harms here in God's Country, also known as the Texas panhandle.

[b]I'd weigh in on Tooms' recent posts but I've already addressed those issues at least three times. Tooms lives in a univariate world. That means he thinks economic growth and recessions are a function of only one variable, the party of the President. He doesn't consider technology, globalization, demographic changes like population growth, changes in productivity, the business cycle, Fed policy, events like the pandemic, what's happening in other countries, the make up of Congress, etc. If something like a pandemic comes along,[/b] then it's the Republican president's fault. Biden's American Rescue Plan played no part in igniting inflation here instead of other countries. Instead, it was all the Fed chiefs fault. And that's Trump's fault too, even though Jerome Powell was appointed to the Federal Reserve by Obama, and re-appointed Fed chief by Biden..[/QUOTE]Lolol. Yeah, that is the magical, mystical aspect of it, right?

You hang onto that idea that Trump's Pandemic just "came along" out of nowhere and maybe dummies who aren't paying attention will, you know, not vote for the one Party that can and has prevented those horrific results from magically, mystically materializing.

So the Pandemic, the Great Depression, Eisenhower's three Recessions and crap jobs creation, the S&L Crisis, Reagan's Great Recession, the Financial Crisis, Bush's Great Recession, Trump's $2. 5 Trillion in deficit spending to create fewer jobs with it than without it, his Great Jobs Destruction and Worldwide Economic / Supply-Chain Collapes, etc, etc, all just "came along."

It is only a wild coincidence that none of those things "come along" under Dem economic stewardship. And an even wilder coincidence that all of the notable boomtimes and historic jobs gains in decades and decades and decades happen under Dem stewardship and none under Repub stewardship.

Those great results just "come along" in magical, mystical ways too, don't they?

Poor Repubs. So unlucky.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2823644]History proves that when the economy is bad or in a recession the market is stagnant. When the economy is booming like it was pre pandemic under Trump presidency it soars. Dow was at 19,804. 72 when Trump took office and was over 30,000 when he left office for over a 50% gain in 4 years. Quite an achievement with China trying to kill our economy by starting the virus. Trump policies actually drove the market to 36,000 3 months after his presidency ended before Biden executive orders took effect and killed the economy. Which is doubling in 4 years. Biden on the other hand in 2 1/2 years has managed to drive the markets down 10% and creating highest inflation ever and putting millions into poverty. I am in the financial wealth planning and I talk to investors daily. Obviously you are not a savvy investor or you would gladly go back to Trump economy. And yes Wall Street is always spooked by what the feds do and Biden's historical inflation is causing the feds to do radical things. If you remember under Trump president inflation was under control and feds lowered rates. Like it or not corporations and Americans did better under the Trump presidency. Now they are just trying to hold on until we are done with the worst presidency in the history of the USA.[/QUOTE]You are in "financial wealth planning" and you actually say stuff publicly, I mean loud enough for potential clients to hear, like "The Fed lowers rates when the economy is roaring along and raises them when the economy is doing poorly"?

And stuff like, "That historic Relief Rally in the market immediately after Biden kicked him out of office was a sure sign of how great everyone thought Trump's policies were"?

And stuff like, "$2.5 Trillion added to the deficit in Trump's one and only economic legislation passed in 4 years in exchange for not even 1 percentage point gain in GDP Growth and about a Million fewer jobs created with it than without it was a brilliant, good deal for America"?

Seriously? You actually do that and still squeak out a living?

I am impressed.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2823893]Lolol. Yeah, that is the magical, mystical aspect of it, right?

You hang onto that idea that Trump's Pandemic just "came along" out of nowhere and maybe dummies who aren't paying attention will, you know, not vote for the one Party that can and has prevented those horrific results from magically, mystically materializing.

So the Pandemic, the Great Depression, Eisenhower's three Recessions and crap jobs creation, the S&L Crisis, Reagan's Great Recession, the Financial Crisis, Bush's Great Recession, Trump's $2. 5 Trillion in deficit spending to create fewer jobs with it than without it, his Great Jobs Destruction and Worldwide Economic / Supply-Chain Collapes, etc, etc, all just "came along."

It is only a wild coincidence that none of those things "come along" under Dem economic stewardship. And an even wilder coincidence that all of the notable boomtimes and historic jobs gains in decades and decades and decades happen under Dem stewardship and none under Repub stewardship.

Those great results just "come along" in magical, mystical ways too, don't they?

Poor Repubs. So unlucky.[/QUOTE]Most people are smart enough to know the pandemic came out of Biden buddy China. Even the democrats admit it. But obviously the communists are still protecting China. Biden spending of 7 trillion pretty much makes Trumps 2. 5 trillion look small.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2823895]You are in "financial wealth planning" and you actually say stuff publicly, I mean loud enough for potential clients to hear, like "The Fed lowers rates when the economy is roaring along and raises them when the economy is doing poorly"?

And stuff like, "That historic Relief Rally in the market immediately after Biden kicked him out of office was a sure sign of how great everyone thought Trump's policies were"?

And stuff like, "$2.5 Trillion added to the deficit in Trump's one and only economic legislation passed in 4 years in exchange for not even 1 percentage point gain in GDP Growth and about a Million fewer jobs created with it than without it was a brilliant, good deal for America"?

Seriously? You actually do that and still squeak out a living?

I am impressed.[/QUOTE]You don't have a clue do you? How do you continue making up this shit?

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2823807]San Diego is still one of the better cities in CA as the area I live in is about 50/50 democrats and republicans. [b]But I will retire in Texas or possible Wyoming[/b] and get out of this CA mess in about 7 years. Of course our area still has some of the progressive socialists like Bernie and Tooms. Being with a major wealth management company that is in every state I have to be pretty neutral on politics and I rarely discuss politics with the liberals but I can say that all my clients benefited greatly from the Trump presidency. Majority of my clients bought into energy oil stocks on my recommendations when Biden went to war on domestic oil and it has minimized their losses from Biden incompetence. Many Californians on fixed income are really struggling though with the high costs. Biden inflation is even worse here with Newsome policies.[/QUOTE]Ahhhh, the West. Where men are men. And the sheep are scared.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2824062]Ahhhh, the West. Where men are men. And the sheep are scared.[/QUOTE]Don't be silly PVMonger. Thanks to globalization we don't need sheep anymore! We've got Mexican hookers in border towns from Matamoros to Tijuana! Asian Massage Parlors in every town over 5,000 population! And Cuban strippers in every gentlemen's club!

And besides, our Colombian brethren taught us that burros are far preferable to sheep.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VKWLC87Uzw[/URL]

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2823766][URL]https://i.pinimg.com/736x/6b/a6/0f/6ba60fc2d49a42c61bf6f7cd8f5227e3.jpg[/URL]

"A machine like this is required to move 500 tons of earth / ore which will be.

Refined into one lithium car battery. It burns 900-1000 gallons of fuel in a 12-hour shift.

Lithium is refined from ore using sulfuric acid. The proposed lithium mine at Thacker Pass, Nevada is estimated to require up to 75 semi-loads of sulfuric acid a day. ! The acid does not turn into unicorn food as AOC believes.

Refining lithium has created several EPA SUPERFUND SITES. IT IS VERY.

TOXIC TO THE ENVIRONMENT.

A battery in an electric car, let's say an average Tesla, is made of:

25 pounds of lithium.

60 pounds of nickel.

44 pounds of manganese.

30 pounds of cobalt.

200 pounds of copper.

And.

400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic, etc. Averaging 750-1,000 pounds of minerals, that had to be mined and processed.

Into a battery that merely stores electricity. Electricity which is generated by.

Oil, gas, coal, or water (and a tiny fraction of wind and solar).

That is the truth, about the lie, of "green" energy.

There's nothing green about the "Green New Deal".

You people better learn how to vote or this nonsense will continue to flow down on top of you from the throne of government upon of which you put these people.

Stop drinking the Green New Deal's sulfuric acid Kool-Aid. !

Dr. Phillip A. Fields.

University of South Alabama.

Mobile, Alabama.[/QUOTE]The Wall Street Journal had a good article on this today, about Toyota and EV's.

[URL]https://www.wsj.com/articles/targeting-toyota-for-its-electric-vehicle-heresy-akio-toyoda-hybrids-ev-climate-change-b5f67d6c?mod=opinion_major_pos1[/URL]

Here's an excerpt.

A Toyota memo to auto dealers in April explained the challenges to full electrification. For instance, "most public chargers can take anywhere from 8-30 hours to charge. To meet the federal (zero-emissions vehicle) sales targets, 1. 2 M public chargers are needed by 2030. That amounts to approximately 400 new chargers per day. " The USA Isn't close to meeting that goal.

Toyota also noted that "more than 300 new lithium, cobalt, nickel and graphite mines are needed to meet the expected battery demand by 2035," and they could take decades to develop. [B] The amount of raw materials in one long-range battery electric vehicle could instead be used to make 6 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles or 90 hybrid electric vehicles.

And heres an even more striking statistic: The overall carbon reduction of those 90 hybrids over their lifetimes is 37 times as much as a single battery electric vehicle.[/B] These inconvenient truths undermine the climate religion and government mandates.

End of excerpt

Volvo did a study where they looked at the number of months you'd need to drive one of their EV models for the carbon footprint of the EV not to exceed the carbon footprint of a conventional internal combustion auto. It was about 70 months, assuming you don't have to replace the batteries. Replace the batteries and it's longer than 70 months.

Anyway, I think Toyota is saying their hybrids have a smaller carbon footprint than the EV's! This would depend a lot of the source of the power used to charge the EV's though. If it's hydropower in Washington state, the EV's footprint would be a lot lower than if it's coal in West Virginia for example.

It sounds like the greenies are promoting policies that will actually increase carbon emissions, by insisting on EV's over hybrids!

Where have we seen this before? Well, I'd point out Biden's proposal to boost the maximum capital gains tax to 40.8%. That would be in a state with no income tax. In California you'd be looking at 54.1%. The Congressional Budget Office has traditionally assumed 28% is the revenue-maximizing capital gains rate. You raise the rate too high and people just don't sell assets, so they don't have to pay the tax. So you end up raising less revenues for the government with the higher tax!

This is all part of the Progressive Democrats "cut off your nose to spite your face" master plan.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2824041]
[b]Pandemic came from China[/b]
Most people are smart enough to know the pandemic came out of Biden buddy China. Even the democrats admit it. But obviously the communists are still protecting China. Biden spending of 7 trillion pretty much makes Trumps 2. 5 trillion look small.[/QUOTE]All indications are the [I]virus[/I] originated in China, very likely in the labs from which Trump defunded and removed all of the monitors whose actual job it was to alert the responsible authorities to such earliest emerging cases in order to prevent, say it with me, [I]a Pandemic.[/I].

Trump did that contrary to all expert warnings not to do something so stupid and dangerous because his doing so was laying the basic groundwork for allowing, say it with me, [I]a Pandemic[/I] to develop.

Trump did that at least 5 months before those first cases emerged in China when even he knew that a mere 2-3 month heads up about that would have been plenty of time to have avoided "all these problems", otherwise known as, say it with me, [I]a Pandemic.[/I].

It seems you know about as much about the difference between a virus and a Pandemic as the difference between a Great Recession, Massive Jobs Destruction and Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates and a mild recession artificially induced by the Fed in order to cool down an overheated economy, more jobs created in 2 1/2 years than in any other President's 4 year term and an unemployment rate still well into Full Employment below 4%.

You might want to steer clear of any career in finance or science.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2824055]You don't have a clue do you? How do you continue making up this shit?[/QUOTE]LOL. That "shit" was your position and what you were arguing for. Did you read your own post? You know, the one I quoted and merely reiterated as ordinary assertions?

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824082]The Wall Street Journal had a good article on this today, about Toyota and EV's.

[URL]https://www.wsj.com/articles/targeting-toyota-for-its-electric-vehicle-heresy-akio-toyoda-hybrids-ev-climate-change-b5f67d6c?mod=opinion_major_pos1[/URL]

Here's an excerpt.

A Toyota memo to auto dealers in April explained the challenges to full electrification. For instance, "most public chargers can take anywhere from 8-30 hours to charge. To meet the federal (zero-emissions vehicle) sales targets, 1. 2 M public chargers are needed by 2030. That amounts to approximately 400 new chargers per day. " The USA Isn't close to meeting that goal.

Toyota also noted that "more than 300 new lithium, cobalt, nickel and graphite mines are needed to meet the expected battery demand by 2035," and they could take decades to develop. [B] The amount of raw materials in one long-range battery electric vehicle could instead be used to make 6 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles or 90 hybrid electric vehicles.

And heres an even more striking statistic: The overall carbon reduction of those 90 hybrids over their lifetimes is 37 times as much as a single battery electric vehicle.[/B] These inconvenient truths undermine the climate religion and government mandates.

End of excerpt

Volvo did a study where they looked at the number of months you'd need to drive one of their EV models for the carbon footprint of the EV not to exceed the carbon footprint of a conventional internal combustion auto. It was about 70 months, assuming you don't have to replace the batteries. Replace the batteries and it's longer than 70 months.

Anyway, I think Toyota is saying their hybrids have a smaller carbon footprint than the EV's! This would depend a lot of the source of the power used to charge the EV's though. If it's hydropower in Washington state, the EV's footprint would be a lot lower than if it's coal in West Virginia for example.

It sounds like the greenies are promoting policies that will actually increase carbon emissions, by insisting on EV's over hybrids!

Where have we seen this before? Well, I'd point out Biden's proposal to boost the maximum capital gains tax to 40.8%. That would be in a state with no income tax. In California you'd be looking at 54.1%. The Congressional Budget Office has traditionally assumed 28% is the revenue-maximizing capital gains rate. You raise the rate too high and people just don't sell assets, so they don't have to pay the tax. So you end up raising less revenues for the government with the higher tax!

This is all part of the Progressive Democrats "cut off your nose to spite your face" master plan.[/QUOTE]Lithium extraction and everything involved with making batteries is only one thing wrong with this fantasy of electric cars. How can people be so fooled and stupid not to realize. But please remember, it's now the the's who are stupid but Reagan and Bush overturned Jimmy's order of having all vehicles get 40 mpg by I forget what year but it is well in the past now. Had we spent the time, brain power and money to comply we wouldn't need electric vehicles or even consider them today. They are ALL FOOLS. And we would not need to drill in the Gulf of Mexico or have the pipeline or need to fight wars for oil. Nobody paid attention to Joey giving away the leases to drill in the Gulf. If anyone was a Seinfeld fan, he reminds me of the role that Loyd Bridges played as the grandfather who still thought he was a tough guy.

No place to run or hide from the madness of both parties.

I laugh when I even think about the charging aspect. Had an argument with a guy here a while ago and he thought that some new short time charging would be invented. How's that for a fairy tale? Charge a car as fast as you can pump gas. It too funny. Maybe the Easter Bunny will come up with something.

All I know is that I pay gains on my portfolio even though its value has gone down! Why are there no working people in Congress? They are all lawyersor millionaires or both. They don't have a clue about reality.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2824062]Ahhhh, the West. Where men are men. And the sheep are scared.[/QUOTE]I had several friends move to Wyoming to get out of this devastated state. No state income tax and they can start taking their huge gains from the Trump presidency and screw California out of the tax. Seems to be the pattern for about 200,000 people who left California the last couple of years to live In Republican states. Less taxes. Less crime. Less wokeness. It seems like the smart thing to do.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824082]The Wall Street Journal had a good article on this today, about Toyota and EV's.

[URL]https://www.wsj.com/articles/targeting-toyota-for-its-electric-vehicle-heresy-akio-toyoda-hybrids-ev-climate-change-b5f67d6c?mod=opinion_major_pos1[/URL]

Here's an excerpt.

A Toyota memo to auto dealers in April explained the challenges to full electrification. For instance, "most public chargers can take anywhere from 8-30 hours to charge. To meet the federal (zero-emissions vehicle) sales targets, 1. 2 M public chargers are needed by 2030. That amounts to approximately 400 new chargers per day. " The USA Isn't close to meeting that goal.

Toyota also noted that "more than 300 new lithium, cobalt, nickel and graphite mines are needed to meet the expected battery demand by 2035," and they could take decades to develop. [B] The amount of raw materials in one long-range battery electric vehicle could instead be used to make 6 plug-in hybrid electric vehicles or 90 hybrid electric vehicles.

And heres an even more striking statistic: The overall carbon reduction of those 90 hybrids over their lifetimes is 37 times as much as a single battery electric vehicle.[/B] These inconvenient truths undermine the climate religion and government mandates.

End of excerpt

Volvo did a study where they looked at the number of months you'd need to drive one of their EV models for the carbon footprint of the EV not to exceed the carbon footprint of a conventional internal combustion auto. It was about 70 months, assuming you don't have to replace the batteries. Replace the batteries and it's longer than 70 months.

Anyway, I think Toyota is saying their hybrids have a smaller carbon footprint than the EV's! This would depend a lot of the source of the power used to charge the EV's though. If it's hydropower in Washington state, the EV's footprint would be a lot lower than if it's coal in West Virginia for example.

It sounds like the greenies are promoting policies that will actually increase carbon emissions, by insisting on EV's over hybrids!

Where have we seen this before? Well, I'd point out Biden's proposal to boost the maximum capital gains tax to 40.8%. That would be in a state with no income tax. In California you'd be looking at 54.1%. The Congressional Budget Office has traditionally assumed 28% is the revenue-maximizing capital gains rate. You raise the rate too high and people just don't sell assets, so they don't have to pay the tax. So you end up raising less revenues for the government with the higher tax!

This is all part of the Progressive Democrats "cut off your nose to spite your face" master plan.[/QUOTE]The carbon footprint to make one lithium battery for Tesla is 10 times more than what a SUV would produce in its lifetime. Really green!

[QUOTE=ChuchoLoco;2824097]

No place to run or hide from the madness of both parties.

[/QUOTE]That's the reality of voters continuining to maintain the status quo by voting along traditional 2 party lines.

The People's Party:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PgZtspUIxk4[/URL]

You know it makes sense.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2824111]I had several friends move to Wyoming to get out of this devastated state. No state income tax and they can start taking their [b]huge gains from the Trump presidency[/b] and screw California out of the tax. Seems to be the pattern for about 200,000 people who left California the last couple of years to live In Republican states. Less taxes. Less crime. Less wokeness. It seems like the smart thing to do.[/QUOTE]They must have been heavily invested in Pfizer, Moderna, payday loan shops, gun manufacturers and liquor sales.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824083]All indications are the [I]virus[/I] originated in China, very likely in the labs from which Trump defunded and removed all of the monitors whose actual job it was to alert the responsible authorities to such earliest emerging cases in order to prevent, say it with me, [I]a Pandemic.[/I].

Trump did that contrary to all expert warnings not to do something so stupid and dangerous because his doing so was laying the basic groundwork for allowing, say it with me, [I]a Pandemic[/I] to develop.

Trump did that at least 5 months before those first cases emerged in China when even he knew that a mere 2-3 month heads up about that would have been plenty of time to have avoided "all these problems", otherwise known as, say it with me, [I]a Pandemic.[/I].

It seems you know about as much about the difference between a virus and a Pandemic as the difference between a Great Recession, Massive Jobs Destruction and Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates and a mild recession artificially induced by the Fed in order to cool down an overheated economy, more jobs created in 2 1/2 years than in any other President's 4 year term and an unemployment rate still well into Full Employment below 4%.

You might want to steer clear of any career in finance or science.[/QUOTE]I feel sorry for you. You were so blinded by your hate for Trump that you did not take advantage of the economic boom of his presidency. The smart people all bought into Trump economy and made millions. You on the other hand falsely ran it down and made nothing. Now the people that made millions are just making money on dividends and interest as Biden recession has stagnated the markets. You can preach all day how bad Trump economy was while we spend our millions. Good for you!

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824262]They must have been heavily invested in Pfizer, Moderna, payday loan shops, gun manufacturers and liquor sales.[/QUOTE]Every sector in the markets boomed under Trump presidency. Yes we were dumb enough to believe in Trump economy and made millions. You on the other hand were smarter than most and stayed out of the Trump booming markets. And you made nothing.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2823644]History proves that when the economy is bad or in a recession the market is stagnant. [b]When the economy is booming like it was pre pandemic under Trump presidency it soars. Dow was at 19,804. 72 when Trump took office and was over 30,000 when he left office for over a 50% gain in 4 years.[/b] Quite an achievement with China trying to kill our economy by starting the virus. Trump policies actually drove the market to 36,000 3 months after his presidency ended before Biden executive orders took effect and killed the economy. Which is doubling in 4 years. Biden on the other hand in 2 1/2 years has managed to drive the markets down 10% and creating highest inflation ever and putting millions into poverty. I am in the financial wealth planning and I talk to investors daily. Obviously you are not a savvy investor or you would gladly go back to Trump economy. And yes Wall Street is always spooked by what the feds do and Biden's historical inflation is causing the feds to do radical things. If you remember under Trump president inflation was under control and feds lowered rates. Like it or not corporations and Americans did better under the Trump presidency. Now they are just trying to hold on until we are done with the worst presidency in the history of the USA.[/QUOTE]While financial media and some pundits like to cite the Dow because with just 30 stocks in that Index there is always some showbiz dramatic volatility to sweat over and report, savy investors know Wall Srreet's go-to Index to measure the condition of the broad USA Stock Market is the S&P 500 Index. It is simply a far more accurate and representative measure of the broad USA Stock Market.

Actually, it has always been a mystery to me why pro Trump wingers who claim to know something about the stock market even bother to cite starting points, ending points and that the numbers in the Dow show, glory of glory, during Trump's tenure as so-called president the Dow produced "over a 50% gain in four years"!

Really?

Guys, let me help you out with a tremendous favor for your cherry-picked Repub Trump talking point that you have been missing all this time: during Trump's so-called presidency, Wall Street's much preferred measure, the S&P 500 Index gained almost 70%! LOL. Yep. It has always been right there under your supposedly savy investor noses. LOL.

[URL]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history/[/URL]

Now, bear in mind a few Fun Facts about that and others' records.

1. The reason the USA Stock Market did that well under Trump while even his pre Trump's Pandemic jobs creation and GDP growth were crap relative to the Trillions he charged American tax payers to get there is because his one and only economic / tax legislation did not produce notable jobs creation or economic expansion results. No, as expected and predicted by the Dems who did not vote for it, that money was spent buying back company stocks and skyrocketing corporate and CEO pay:

[B]Did Trumps tax cuts boost hiring? Most companies say no[/B]

[URL]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/did-trumps-tax-cuts-boost-hiring-most-companies-say-no[/URL]

[QUOTE]Instead companies put much of the money toward stock buybacks rather than investments. Buybacks hit a record $1 trillion in 2018, a nearly 50 percent increase from the year before.[/QUOTE]So, sorry farmers, the welfare checks Trump sent you was pretty much all of it for you. And sorry, job hunters, Trump's one and only legislative accomplishment was about flooding the stock market with hot windfall profits, not creating jobs.

Oh well.

Back to more S&P 500 Index Fun Facts:

2. The average annual gain in the USA Stock Market as measured by Wall Street's go-to preferred Index, see historical data table link above, for the most recent presidential tenures is:

GHW Bush, +13%.

Bill Clinton, +26.25%.

GW Bush, -10%.

Barack Obama, +22.75%.

Donald Trump, +17.3%.

3. As of this writing, the gain during Joe Biden's tenure at a bit less than 2 1/2 years in office is about +11%.

However, that is in the midst of all the lingering horrific worldwide economic, supply-chain and inflation fallout from Trump's policy of defunding and removing the Pandemic Prevention and Response Teams from known bad actor in these matters China at the worst possible time and then spending a critical year lying and doing everything a so-called world leader could do to create and develop a devastating Pandemic.

4. To further put the above number into perspective, after just a bit less than 2 years in office, on December 24,2018, Trump's gain in that Index was only 3. 5%. Yep, after almost 2 full years in office and with none of the Trump's Pandemic historically damaging headwinds working against him.

And that was a full year after his one and only economic / tax policy legislation was signed and passed.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824262]They must have been heavily invested in Pfizer, Moderna...[/QUOTE]Thank goodness for Operation Warp Speed! And for President Trump ramming the vaccines through the FDA in record time!

Hundreds of thousands of lives were being saved in the USA with Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, while you were still waiting for a puny ass SinoVac shot in Thailand.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824445]Thank goodness for Operation Warp Speed! And for President Trump ramming the vaccines through the FDA in record time!

Hundreds of thousands of lives were being saved in the USA with Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, while you were still waiting for a puny ass SinoVac shot in Thailand.[/QUOTE]If only Trump had not defunded and removed all the agents whose very job it was to monitor and report the earliest cases to responsible parties who could then close off and quarantine just the area in China where it was still only an epidemic at most and not a Pandemic.

That one Flatten The Curve move would have slowed down further spread of the virus outside of that area and given the medical authorities months of a head start to implement Obama's Rapid Vaccine program in order to sensibly and by the book create, test, distribute and administer vaccines in America and everywhere else in the world so that by the time it ultimately and inevitably did arrive in America and other countries, virtually no deaths, no overwhelming hospitalizations, no closures, no supply-chain collapses, no massive jobs destruction and no worldwide economic devastation would have happened anywhere at all in the first place other than that particular area of China.

Wouldn't that have been a far better outcome? Yes, the Obama Administration certainly thought so. That's why they set up that Rapid Vaccine program and produced the Pandemic Response protocol manual that they gave and tried to explain to Trump but all evidence is nobody in the Trump administration bothered to read it.

[B]Obama team left pandemic playbook for Trump administration, officials confirm.[/B]

[URL]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/obama-team-left-pandemic-playbook-for-trump-administration-officials-confirm[/URL]

[B]How Trump Gutted Obamas Pandemic-Preparedness Systems.
Former officials: Trumps reshuffling of positions and departments, focus on business solutions, downgrading of science, left the country dangerously unprepared for an unprecedented pandemic.[/B]

[URL]https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/trump-obama-coronavirus-pandemic-response[/URL]

[B]A andemic plan was in place. Trump abandoned it and science in the face of Covid-19.[/B]

[URL]https://www.statnews.com/2020/05/17/the-art-of-the-pandemic-how-donald-trump-walked-the-u-s-into-the-covid-19-era/[/URL]

[B]'They didn't run the plays': Ex-officials say Trump administration didn't use pandemic 'playbooks'.
Trump criticized a "system we inherited," but ex-officials say plans existed.[/B]

[URL]https://abcnews.go.com/Health/run-plays-officials-trump-administration-pandemic-playbooks/story?id=71999769[/URL]

Oh, my free shots here were 2 Astra-Zenicas. I did pay about $100 USD for a couple of Moderna shots paced out perfectly and recently got a free Moderna booster shot.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824445]Thank goodness for Operation Warp Speed! And for President Trump ramming the vaccines through the FDA in record time!

Hundreds of thousands of lives were being saved in the USA with Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, while you were still waiting for a puny ass SinoVac shot in Thailand.[/QUOTE]In reality, hundreds of thousands of "blue lives" in the USA were saved with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Repubs were dying by the boatload while taking ivermectin, drinking bleach martinis and / or inserting lightbulbs up their rectums.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824440]While financial media and some pundits like to cite the Dow because with just 30 stocks in that Index there is always some showbiz dramatic volatility to sweat over and report, savy investors know Wall Srreet's go-to Index to measure the condition of the broad USA Stock Market is the S&P 500 Index. It is simply a far more accurate and representative measure of the broad USA Stock Market.

Actually, it has always been a mystery to me why pro Trump wingers who claim to know something about the stock market even bother to cite starting points, ending points and that the numbers in the Dow show, glory of glory, during Trump's tenure as so-called president the Dow produced "over a 50% gain in four years"!

Really?

Guys, let me help you out with a tremendous favor for your cherry-picked Repub Trump talking point that you have been missing all this time: during Trump's so-called presidency, Wall Street's much preferred measure, the S&P 500 Index gained almost 70%! LOL. Yep. It has always been right there under your supposedly savy investor noses. LOL.

[URL]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history/[/URL]

Now, bear in mind a few Fun Facts about that and others' records.

1. The reason the USA Stock Market did that well under Trump while even his pre Trump's Pandemic jobs creation and GDP growth were crap relative to the Trillions he charged American tax payers to get there is because his one and only economic / tax legislation did not produce notable jobs creation or economic expansion results. No, as expected and predicted by the Dems who did not vote for it, that money was spent buying back company stocks and skyrocketing corporate and CEO pay:

[B]Did Trumps tax cuts boost hiring? Most companies say no[/B]

[URL]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/did-trumps-tax-cuts-boost-hiring-most-companies-say-no[/URL]

So, sorry farmers, the welfare checks Trump sent you was pretty much all of it for you. And sorry, job hunters, Trump's one and only legislative accomplishment was about flooding the stock market with hot windfall profits, not creating jobs.

Oh well.

Back to more S&P 500 Index Fun Facts:

2. The average annual gain in the USA Stock Market as measured by Wall Street's go-to preferred Index, see historical data table link above, for the most recent presidential tenures is:

GHW Bush, +13%.

Bill Clinton, +26.25%.

GW Bush, -10%.

Barack Obama, +22.75%.

Donald Trump, +17.3%.

3. As of this writing, the gain during Joe Biden's tenure at a bit less than 2 1/2 years in office is about +11%.

However, that is in the midst of all the lingering horrific worldwide economic, supply-chain and inflation fallout from Trump's policy of defunding and removing the Pandemic Prevention and Response Teams from known bad actor in these matters China at the worst possible time and then spending a critical year lying and doing everything a so-called world leader could do to create and develop a devastating Pandemic.

4. To further put the above number into perspective, after just a bit less than 2 years in office, on December 24,2018, Trump's gain in that Index was only 3. 5%. Yep, after almost 2 full years in office and with none of the Trump's Pandemic historically damaging headwinds working against him.

And that was a full year after his one and only economic / tax policy legislation was signed and passed.[/QUOTE]That's mostly coincidental. Trying to tie stock market performance, like GDP growth, to the party of the president doesn't make sense.

I will concede that the invasion of Iraq spearheaded by George W. Bush wasn't good in the long run for our economy or stock markets.

The numbers in your table are wrong. Here are the per annum gains in the S&P 500 Index during each presidency. Bush was handicapped by a recession that he had little to do with. Trump similarly was hurt by a pandemic that he could not have prevented, contrary to your belief. And Obama was helped by taking the reins at the bottom of a recession.

GHW Bush, 11%/ year.

Bill Clinton, 15%/ year.

GW Bush, -6%/ year.

Barack Obama, 14%/ year.

Donald Trump, 14%/ year.

Donald Trump, +17.3%.

You should be kissing the ground that Trump walks on, because of the Republican's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Lowering the average state + federal corporate tax rate from 41% to 27% increases after tax earnings by 24%. If you assume the earnings (P / E) multiple stocks are valued at remains the same, then your mutual funds are worth 24% more.

BTW, in 2022, with the lower rates, government receipts from the corporate income tax were the third highest in history.

[URL]https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824569]
Donald Trump, 14%/ year.

Donald Trump, +17.3%.[/QUOTE]Sorry, 14%/ year is the correct per annum growth growth rate in the S&P 500 during Trump's term. Not to say that means anything. Correlations between the party of the president and S&P 500 performance are mostly spurious.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2824552]In reality, hundreds of thousands of "blue lives" in the USA were saved with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Repubs were dying by the boatload while taking ivermectin, drinking bleach martinis and / or inserting lightbulbs up their rectums.[/QUOTE]Yes, hundreds of thousands of blue lives were saved! Well PVMonger, like I said, Trump is the Democrat's best friend. Just look at the Republicans' performance in the 2018,2020 and 2022 elections. Trump almost singlehandedly caused Republicans to lose the Senate in 2020 and 2022.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824520]
Oh, my free shots here were 2 Astra-Zenicas. I did pay about $100 USD for a couple of Moderna shots paced out perfectly and recently got a free Moderna booster shot.[/QUOTE]Astra Zeneca was a lot less effective and more likely to cause serious side effects than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.

Believe it or not Tooms, I like you, in a cyber kind of way. One piece of advice. You may wish to consult with your physician and take a look at CDC guidelines before you get additional boosters. They make or may not make sense based on your age and pre-existing conditions. There are three papers out recently that indicate boosters may actually increase the probability a person will be infected with COVID. I tend to believe they do still offer good protection against severe disease caused by the latest Omicron variants. But if COVID's largely under control, like it is now, it may not make sense to get additional bivalent boosters. I believe the CDC's recommendation though is to go ahead and get the first bivalent booster if you haven't already gotten it. If you got the Moderna vaccine in the USA in the last 7 or 8 months, it would be bivalent (effective against Omicron). I'm not sure about Thailand. Here's a summary of what's going on.

[URL]https://www.icpcovid.com/en/news/7-may-2023-episode-332-critical-evaluation-covid-vaccine-effectiveness-during-successive[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824569]That's mostly coincidental. Trying to tie stock market performance, like GDP growth, to the party of the president doesn't make sense.

I will concede that the invasion of Iraq spearheaded by George W. Bush wasn't good in the long run for our economy or stock markets.

[b]The numbers in your table are wrong. Here are the per annum gains in the S&P 500 Index during each presidency.[/b] Bush was handicapped by a recession that he had little to do with. Trump similarly was hurt by a pandemic that he could not have prevented, contrary to your belief. And Obama was helped by taking the reins at the bottom of a recession.[/QUOTE]You're going to have to show me where the starting point and ending point in the S&P 500 for each president cited, January 20 the year they took office, January 19 as I recall for Obama, to January 20 the year the next president took office for the total gain during their tenure, then divided by the number of years each was in office for the Average Annual Gain, is wrong while yours is right.

And based on what source?

Here is my source:

[URL]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history/[/URL]

GHW Bush, 286 to 433 = 52% gain, divided by 4 = 13%.

Bill Clinton, 433 to 1342 = 210% gain, divided by 8 = 26.25%.

GW Bush, 1342 to 805 = -40% "gain", divided by 8 = -10%.

Barack Obama, 805 to 2271 = 182% gain, divided by 8 = 22.75%.

Donald Trump, 2271 to 3851 = 69.5% gain, divided by 4 = 17.3%.

Joe Biden, 3851 to 4284 yesterday = 11.2%.

Sure, it is always possible that I misread or mistyped a number here and there. So where did I get it "wrong" and where did you get different numbers?

Oh, of course, GW Bush's stewardship had nothing to do with his Great Repub Recession despite his strict instructions to his Office of Thrift Supervision to really get in there to dig up any and all Liar Loans being floated and make sure all those Repub-beloved Banking Regulations are followed to the letter.

And Trump's Pandemic just "came along" under Trump despite his tireless efforts to make sure any and all early coronavirus infection cases were identified and reported ASAP so, you know, we could get that 2-3 month jump on the forcefully endorsed mitigation efforts and prevent such a devastating Pandemic from taking shape.

Yeah. Yeah. That's the ticket. As everyone knows, those poor poor Repubs are just magically and mystically unlucky.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824440]While financial media and some pundits like to cite the Dow because with just 30 stocks in that Index there is always some showbiz dramatic volatility to sweat over and report, savy investors know Wall Srreet's go-to Index to measure the condition of the broad USA Stock Market is the S&P 500 Index. It is simply a far more accurate and representative measure of the broad USA Stock Market.

Actually, it has always been a mystery to me why pro Trump wingers who claim to know something about the stock market even bother to cite starting points, ending points and that the numbers in the Dow show, glory of glory, during Trump's tenure as so-called president the Dow produced "over a 50% gain in four years"!

Really?

Guys, let me help you out with a tremendous favor for your cherry-picked Repub Trump talking point that you have been missing all this time: during Trump's so-called presidency, Wall Street's much preferred measure, the S&P 500 Index gained almost 70%! LOL. Yep. It has always been right there under your supposedly savy investor noses. LOL.

[URL]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history/[/URL]

Now, bear in mind a few Fun Facts about that and others' records.

1. The reason the USA Stock Market did that well under Trump while even his pre Trump's Pandemic jobs creation and GDP growth were crap relative to the Trillions he charged American tax payers to get there is because his one and only economic / tax legislation did not produce notable jobs creation or economic expansion results. No, as expected and predicted by the Dems who did not vote for it, that money was spent buying back company stocks and skyrocketing corporate and CEO pay:

[B]Did Trumps tax cuts boost hiring? Most companies say no[/B]

[URL]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/did-trumps-tax-cuts-boost-hiring-most-companies-say-no[/URL]

So, sorry farmers, the welfare checks Trump sent you was pretty much all of it for you. And sorry, job hunters, Trump's one and only legislative accomplishment was about flooding the stock market with hot windfall profits, not creating jobs.

Oh well.

Back to more S&P 500 Index Fun Facts:

2. The average annual gain in the USA Stock Market as measured by Wall Street's go-to preferred Index, see historical data table link above, for the most recent presidential tenures is:

GHW Bush, +13%.

Bill Clinton, +26.25%.

GW Bush, -10%.

Barack Obama, +22.75%.

Donald Trump, +17.3%.

3. As of this writing, the gain during Joe Biden's tenure at a bit less than 2 1/2 years in office is about +11%.

However, that is in the midst of all the lingering horrific worldwide economic, supply-chain and inflation fallout from Trump's policy of defunding and removing the Pandemic Prevention and Response Teams from known bad actor in these matters China at the worst possible time and then spending a critical year lying and doing everything a so-called world leader could do to create and develop a devastating Pandemic.

4. To further put the above number into perspective, after just a bit less than 2 years in office, on December 24,2018, Trump's gain in that Index was only 3. 5%. Yep, after almost 2 full years in office and with none of the Trump's Pandemic historically damaging headwinds working against him.

And that was a full year after his one and only economic / tax policy legislation was signed and passed.[/QUOTE]Here is another Fun Fact about the S&P 500 Index:

5. It ought to be mentioned at least in passing that the S&P 500 Index gained a whopping 14.3%, almost as much as a year of Trump's Average Annual Gain in the broad USA Stock Market just in those 2 months and 3 weeks from election day, November 3, 2020 to Biden's inauguration day on January 20,2021 in one of the greatest post-election Relief Rallies in history on the defeat of Trump and thwarting his bid for "Four More Years"!

Which makes total sense. Wall Street knew very well the hot money windfall profits for CEO and corporate stock buybacks, to skyrocket CEO pay and not do much at all to create jobs or expand the economy, as provided in Trump's one and only economic / tax policy legislation, had pretty much shot its wad by 2020 anyway.

And now it was time for a Dem to do all the right things in the right way at the right time to clean up the colossal mess of the economy produced by classic horrific economic stewardship. As usual. They were justifiably thrilled to buy buy buy as soon as it was obvious Trump's shit storm of a so-called presidency was mercifully out and a responsible adult Dem was in.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2824598]Astra Zeneca was a lot less effective and more likely to cause serious side effects than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines.

Believe it or not Tooms, I like you, in a cyber kind of way. One piece of advice. You may wish to consult with your physician and take a look at CDC guidelines before you get additional boosters. They make or may not make sense based on your age and pre-existing conditions. There are three papers out recently that indicate boosters may actually increase the probability a person will be infected with COVID. I tend to believe they do still offer good protection against severe disease caused by the latest Omicron variants. But if COVID's largely under control, like it is now, it may not make sense to get additional bivalent boosters. I believe the CDC's recommendation though is to go ahead and get the first bivalent booster if you haven't already gotten it. If you got the Moderna vaccine in the USA in the last 7 or 8 months, it would be bivalent (effective against Omicron). I'm not sure about Thailand. Here's a summary of what's going on.

[URL]https://www.icpcovid.com/en/news/7-may-2023-episode-332-critical-evaluation-covid-vaccine-effectiveness-during-successive[/URL][/QUOTE]Thanks for your concern but I had zero negative reaction to any of the shots I've taken. I took the Astra-Zenicas because they were the first acceptable ones imo available here. Then I took the Modernas when they were available here because I had already pre-paid for them before I got the call from one of the best hospitals here to come on in for the free Astra-Zenica shots.

I did get the recent Moderna shot more than a year after my previous shots only because it was adapted for the lastest known variants and would not have bothered to get it otherwise.

[QUOTE=CaliGuy;2824365]Every sector in the markets boomed under Trump presidency. Yes we were dumb enough to believe in Trump economy and made millions. You on the other hand were smarter than most and stayed out of the Trump booming markets. And you made nothing.[/QUOTE]I was fully invested in the stock market all through the Trump years; 80-90% of my equity holdings in a very low cost, beautifully diversified Total Stock Market Index Fund and 10-20% in a very low cost Global Equity Fund.

Dollar for dollar I made far less money in the stock market under GW Bush and Trump than under Clinton and Obama, as the historical data and prices table for that broad market measure shows for all to see.

Except for one thing; I accurately identified the top of the market for one of GW Bush's Bear Market Crashes, acted on it to get out of the market and into a safe haven Money Market Fund for the duration of the decline. Then I accurately identified the exact day of the bottom in the market, acted on that to buy right back into it and made a shitload on those two near perfectly timed sell and buy moves.

As the historical data shows, anyone who simply had money in the broad market without making sharp moves in and out at opportune times since at least the late 1980's or so would have done poorly under the Repub presidents relative to doing very well under the Dem presidents.

I would say that is probably true going all the way back 100 years or so. But I have not put pen to paper on it going back 100 years to give exact numbers on it.

And, yeah, I include Biden in that assessment. Had a Repub been in office since 2021, all historic precedence and evidence is he / she would have proposed and done just about everything imaginable wrong to have turned Trump's Bear Market decline into a deep and prolonged market and economic Crash we would still be struggling to recover from with little or no light on the horizon.

LOL. Just imagine how fucked up the Trump's Pandemic vaccine distribution and administration would have been if Trump or any other Repub had been presiding over it since January 2021. Lolol.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824599]You're going to have to show me where the starting point and ending point in the S&P 500 for each president cited, January 20 the year they took office, January 19 as I recall for Obama, to January 20 the year the next president took office for the total gain during their tenure, then divided by the number of years each was in office for the Average Annual Gain, is wrong while yours is right.

And based on what source?

Here is my source:

[URL]https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history/[/URL]

GHW Bush, 286 to 433 = 52% gain, divided by 4 = 13%.

Bill Clinton, 433 to 1342 = 210% gain, divided by 8 = 26.25%.

GW Bush, 1342 to 805 = -40% "gain", divided by 8 = -10%.

Barack Obama, 805 to 2271 = 182% gain, divided by 8 = 22.75%.

Donald Trump, 2271 to 3851 = 69.5% gain, divided by 4 = 17.3%.

Joe Biden, 3851 to 4284 yesterday = 11.2%.

Sure, it is always possible that I misread or mistyped a number here and there. So where did I get it "wrong" and where did you get different numbers?[/QUOTE]

Damn it Tooms, after fellow board members read this exchange, they're going to think neither one of us has a life. Or at least that's what they'll think about me. Your "real world" life is amply illustrated in the Bangkok threads.

We're actually using exactly the same numbers except for the number at the end of the Trump administration. I was using 3841.

Here's the formula for per annum growth,

Per annum growth = (e ^ ((ln(Pf)-ln(Pi))/t)-1

where e = exponential constant = 2.718
^ = "raised to the power of"
ln = natural logarithm
Pf = S&P price at end of period
Pi = S&P price at beginning of period
t = time in years between beginning and end

Unless you do this calculation all the time like I do, it may take some time to calculate or set up in a spreadsheet. But the per annum rates are easy to check. Take George H. W. Bush as an example. The index grew from 286 to 433. I calculated 11% per year:

286 x 1.11 x 1.11 x 1.11 x 1.11 = 434

That is, at 11% per annum growth, the index would be 286 x 1.11 = 317.5 at the end of year 1. Then at 317.5 x 1.11 = 352.43 at the end of year 2, etc.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824599]Oh, of course, GW Bush's stewardship had nothing to do with his Great Repub Recession despite his strict instructions to his Office of Thrift Supervision to really get in there to dig up any and all Liar Loans being floated and make sure all those Repub-beloved Banking Regulations are followed to the letter.[/QUOTE]

Why is Bush any more responsible for the 2008 recession, and consequent fall in the S&P 500, than Bill Clinton or Barney Frank? Yeah, if Bush and his Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and regulators they appointed were omniscient, maybe a recession would have been avoided. But it's unlikely Democrats would have done better. Most of the blame should go to the banks and other financial institutions, and people who thought they could buy $500,000 houses with $50,000 annual income and no money down. And the Fed which probably should have more aggressively cut rates early on. But Bush was a bit player.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824599]And Trump's Pandemic just "came along" under Trump despite his tireless efforts to make sure any and all early coronavirus infection cases were identified and reported ASAP so, you know, we could get that 2-3 month jump on the forcefully endorsed mitigation efforts and prevent such a devastating Pandemic from taking shape.[/QUOTE]

I believe, as you know, that is pretty wild. Trump could not have prevented a pandemic.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824599]

Joe Biden, 3851 to 4284 yesterday = 11.2%.[/QUOTE]The correct percentage for Biden is 4.6%/year BTW, using your beginning and end numbers. I can see why Cali Guy is not impressed.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2824607]Here is another Fun Fact about the S&P 500 Index:

5. It ought to be mentioned at least in passing that the S&P 500 Index gained a whopping 14.3%, almost as much as a year of Trump's Average Annual Gain in the broad USA Stock Market just in those 2 months and 3 weeks from election day, November 3, 2020 to Biden's inauguration day on January 20,2021 in one of the greatest post-election Relief Rallies in history on the defeat of Trump and thwarting his bid for "Four More Years"!

Which makes total sense. Wall Street knew very well the hot money windfall profits for CEO and corporate stock buybacks, to skyrocket CEO pay and not do much at all to create jobs or expand the economy, as provided in Trump's one and only economic / tax policy legislation, had pretty much shot its wad by 2020 anyway.

And now it was time for a Dem to do all the right things in the right way at the right time to clean up the colossal mess of the economy produced by classic horrific economic stewardship. As usual. They were justifiably thrilled to buy buy buy as soon as it was obvious Trump's shit storm of a so-called presidency was mercifully out and a responsible adult Dem was in.[/QUOTE]That's not the way you should look at it. The results of the election were known late on November 3. The change from November 3 to November 4 was 2.2%. That's a very good one day move. It wouldn't surprise me if part of that was indeed due to a seemingly clear Biden victory. (Little did we know).

As to performance between the election and the inauguration, I'd chalk it up to good economic numbers. GDP was growing at a healthy clip and inflation was subdued. That's an ideal situation as far as the market is concerned. It correlates with higher corporate earnings and low interest rates. Of course, Biden and the Democrats screwed that up, the inflation part, with the stimulus provided in the American Rescue Plan in March, 2021.