Bush admin just got involved in FBI's probe into Clinton's emails and it's a game Changer

[sealybobo]

Planned in advance. Everyone knows. Then Reagan Oliver north and bush sold guns to iran

What's your source? I don't believe your bong.

The hostage crisis in Iran remains unresolved in the final weeks of the 1980 presidential election.
This was the surprise that never really happened. For months, Ronald Reagan had warned that President Jimmy Carter would try to create an October surprise by freeing the hostages held by Iran’s revolutionary government since November 1979. But talks with Iran stalled, and the hostages were not freed until after Reagan’s inauguration. (Allegations later emerged that Reagan’s team had secretly negotiated with Iran to delay the release, but repeated investigations never turned up proof of the charge. Even if the allegations were true, there’s no sign Carter lost ground because of them.)

The hostage crisis initially caused a rally-around-the-flag effect in late 1979 — Carter’s popularity surged. By late 1980, however, as the crisis dragged on with apparently no end in sight, it only added to Carter’s campaign woes. Carter clearly did worse in the election than he was doing in the polling before negotiations broke down, but there was a lot going on late in the 1980 campaign, making it hard to attribute Reagan’s performance to any single event. Carter and Reagan, for example, held only one debate, and it was only after the debate that Reagan’s standing jumped, and even then the polls underestimated his final margin of victory. The final polling average for Reagan was +3, but he won the election by 10 points.

Some of the October surprises listed above (the halt in bombing in North Vietnam and Bush’s DWl) appeared to have a modest effect on the polls. Others, less so. All told, these surprises moved the polls — from the week before to the final week — about 1 or 2 percentage points, on average. None of the surprises on this list moved the polls by more than 2 points.

How Much Do ‘October Surprises’ Move The Polls?

Carter was a disaster; Reagan ushered in prosperity.

Reagan was the beginning of the end.

Prosperity, bro. 80's were great.

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today. No doubt he was popular at the time but he's a piece of shit now looking back. Bringing in illegals, the middle east, breaking unions, sending jobs overseas, tax breaks for the rich.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today.

LOL

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So now you like Bush

I voted for the Idiot twice and lived to regret it.

But even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Here's the thing. Bush knew that Nukes were a line you didn't cross. So did mcCain or Romney. Trump doesn't seem to get that.

Sure ya did, Joe

Sure ya did

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

What's your source? I don't believe your bong.

The hostage crisis in Iran remains unresolved in the final weeks of the 1980 presidential election.
This was the surprise that never really happened. For months, Ronald Reagan had warned that President Jimmy Carter would try to create an October surprise by freeing the hostages held by Iran’s revolutionary government since November 1979. But talks with Iran stalled, and the hostages were not freed until after Reagan’s inauguration. (Allegations later emerged that Reagan’s team had secretly negotiated with Iran to delay the release, but repeated investigations never turned up proof of the charge. Even if the allegations were true, there’s no sign Carter lost ground because of them.)

The hostage crisis initially caused a rally-around-the-flag effect in late 1979 — Carter’s popularity surged. By late 1980, however, as the crisis dragged on with apparently no end in sight, it only added to Carter’s campaign woes. Carter clearly did worse in the election than he was doing in the polling before negotiations broke down, but there was a lot going on late in the 1980 campaign, making it hard to attribute Reagan’s performance to any single event. Carter and Reagan, for example, held only one debate, and it was only after the debate that Reagan’s standing jumped, and even then the polls underestimated his final margin of victory. The final polling average for Reagan was +3, but he won the election by 10 points.

Some of the October surprises listed above (the halt in bombing in North Vietnam and Bush’s DWl) appeared to have a modest effect on the polls. Others, less so. All told, these surprises moved the polls — from the week before to the final week — about 1 or 2 percentage points, on average. None of the surprises on this list moved the polls by more than 2 points.

How Much Do ‘October Surprises’ Move The Polls?

Carter was a disaster; Reagan ushered in prosperity.

Reagan was the beginning of the end.

Prosperity, bro. 80's were great.

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today. No doubt he was popular at the time but he's a piece of shit now looking back. Bringing in illegals, the middle east, breaking unions, sending jobs overseas, tax breaks for the rich.

Reagan wasn't perfect; and I'm not on the he could do no wrong conservative bandwagon. I just think compared to other 20th and 21st century presidents, he did a solid job at a minimum.

 

[sealybobo]

The hostage crisis in Iran remains unresolved in the final weeks of the 1980 presidential election.
This was the surprise that never really happened. For months, Ronald Reagan had warned that President Jimmy Carter would try to create an October surprise by freeing the hostages held by Iran’s revolutionary government since November 1979. But talks with Iran stalled, and the hostages were not freed until after Reagan’s inauguration. (Allegations later emerged that Reagan’s team had secretly negotiated with Iran to delay the release, but repeated investigations never turned up proof of the charge. Even if the allegations were true, there’s no sign Carter lost ground because of them.)

The hostage crisis initially caused a rally-around-the-flag effect in late 1979 — Carter’s popularity surged. By late 1980, however, as the crisis dragged on with apparently no end in sight, it only added to Carter’s campaign woes. Carter clearly did worse in the election than he was doing in the polling before negotiations broke down, but there was a lot going on late in the 1980 campaign, making it hard to attribute Reagan’s performance to any single event. Carter and Reagan, for example, held only one debate, and it was only after the debate that Reagan’s standing jumped, and even then the polls underestimated his final margin of victory. The final polling average for Reagan was +3, but he won the election by 10 points.

Some of the October surprises listed above (the halt in bombing in North Vietnam and Bush’s DWl) appeared to have a modest effect on the polls. Others, less so. All told, these surprises moved the polls — from the week before to the final week — about 1 or 2 percentage points, on average. None of the surprises on this list moved the polls by more than 2 points.

How Much Do ‘October Surprises’ Move The Polls?

Carter was a disaster; Reagan ushered in prosperity.

Reagan was the beginning of the end.

Prosperity, bro. 80's were great.

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today. No doubt he was popular at the time but he's a piece of shit now looking back. Bringing in illegals, the middle east, breaking unions, sending jobs overseas, tax breaks for the rich.

Reagan wasn't perfect; and I'm not on the he could do no wrong conservative bandwagon. I just think compared to other 20th and 21st century presidents, he did a solid job at a minimum.

It seemed like it at the time. My Ford employee father even loved Reagan. I loved Reagan.

Then thanks to the internet years later the real truth came out and he was actually the beginning of the new world order. The end. The corporate take over of our country. Trust me, Reagan was no saint.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today.

LOL

Did I attack the god of your religion?

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts

Our bridges are falling apart (among other things), and its Ronald Reagan's fault.

But the rich fought back, and won big-time in 1980 when Reagan, until then the fringe "Voodoo economics" candidate who was heading into the election trailing far behind Jimmy Carter, was swept into the White House on a wave of public concern of the Iranians taking US hostages. Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they're still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.

 

[sealybobo]

The hostage crisis in Iran remains unresolved in the final weeks of the 1980 presidential election.
This was the surprise that never really happened. For months, Ronald Reagan had warned that President Jimmy Carter would try to create an October surprise by freeing the hostages held by Iran’s revolutionary government since November 1979. But talks with Iran stalled, and the hostages were not freed until after Reagan’s inauguration. (Allegations later emerged that Reagan’s team had secretly negotiated with Iran to delay the release, but repeated investigations never turned up proof of the charge. Even if the allegations were true, there’s no sign Carter lost ground because of them.)

The hostage crisis initially caused a rally-around-the-flag effect in late 1979 — Carter’s popularity surged. By late 1980, however, as the crisis dragged on with apparently no end in sight, it only added to Carter’s campaign woes. Carter clearly did worse in the election than he was doing in the polling before negotiations broke down, but there was a lot going on late in the 1980 campaign, making it hard to attribute Reagan’s performance to any single event. Carter and Reagan, for example, held only one debate, and it was only after the debate that Reagan’s standing jumped, and even then the polls underestimated his final margin of victory. The final polling average for Reagan was +3, but he won the election by 10 points.

Some of the October surprises listed above (the halt in bombing in North Vietnam and Bush’s DWl) appeared to have a modest effect on the polls. Others, less so. All told, these surprises moved the polls — from the week before to the final week — about 1 or 2 percentage points, on average. None of the surprises on this list moved the polls by more than 2 points.

How Much Do ‘October Surprises’ Move The Polls?

Carter was a disaster; Reagan ushered in prosperity.

Reagan was the beginning of the end.

Prosperity, bro. 80's were great.

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today. No doubt he was popular at the time but he's a piece of shit now looking back. Bringing in illegals, the middle east, breaking unions, sending jobs overseas, tax breaks for the rich.

Reagan wasn't perfect; and I'm not on the he could do no wrong conservative bandwagon. I just think compared to other 20th and 21st century presidents, he did a solid job at a minimum.

In addition to badly throwing the nation into debt, Reagan's tax cut blew out the ceiling on the accumulation of wealth, leading to a new Gilded Age and the rise of a generation of super-wealthy that hadn't been seen since the Robber Baron era of the 1890s or the Roaring 20s.

And, most tragically, Reagan's tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, we've been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.

We even stopped investing in the intellectual infrastructure of this nation: college education. A degree that a student in the 1970s could have paid for by working as a waitress at a Howard Johnson's restaurant (what my wife did in the late 60s - I did so working as a near-minimum-wage DJ) now means incurring massive and life-altering debt for all but the very wealthy. Reagan, who as governor ended free tuition at the University of California, put into place the foundations for the explosion in college tuition we see today.

 

[Roudy]

Well of course the Bushes are taking Hillary's side here, after the humiliating way Trump mopped the floor with Jeb Bush's face during the primaries.

 

[sealybobo]

When Reagan dropped the top income tax rate from over 70% down to under 30%, all hell broke loose. With the legal and social restraint to unlimited selfishness removed, "the good of the nation" was replaced by "greed is good" as the primary paradigm.

In the years since then, mind-boggling wealth has risen among fewer than 20,000 people in America (the top 0.01 percent of wage-earners), but their influence has been tremendous. They finance "conservative" think tanks (think Joseph Coors and the Heritage Foundation), change public opinion (Walton heirs funding a covert effort to change the "estate tax" to the "death tax"), lobby congress and the president (who calls the "haves and the have-more's" his "base"), and work to strip down public institutions.

The middle class is being replaced by the working poor. American infrastructure built with tax revenues during the 1934-1981 is now crumbling and disintegrating. Hospitals and highways and power and water systems have been corporatized. People are dying.

And Bush, following closely in Reagan's footsteps, is making things worse. As Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out at recent hearings for the confirmation of Bush's new nominee for the Office of Management and Budget:

Since Bush has been president:

• over 5 million people have slipped into poverty;
• nearly 7 million Americans have lost their health insurance;
• median household income has gone down by nearly $1,300;
• three million manufacturing jobs have been lost;
• three million American workers have lost their pensions;
• home foreclosures are now the highest on record;
• the personal savings rate is below zero - which hasn't happened since the great depression;
• the real earnings of college graduates have gone down by about 5% in the last few years;
• entry level wages for male and female high school graduates have fallen by over 3%;
• wages and salaries are now at the lowest share of GDP since 1929.

The debate about whether or not to roll Bush's tax cuts back to Clinton's modest mid-30% rates is absurd. It's time to roll back the horribly failed experiment of the Reagan tax cuts. And use that money to pay down Reagan's debt and rebuild this nation.

 

[sealybobo]

Well of course the Bushes are taking Hillary's side here, after the humiliating way Trump mopped the floor with Jeb Bush's face during the primaries.

And you guys defended that name for 12 years. Amazing

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today.

LOL

Did I attack the god of your religion?

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts

Our bridges are falling apart (among other things), and its Ronald Reagan's fault.

But the rich fought back, and won big-time in 1980 when Reagan, until then the fringe "Voodoo economics" candidate who was heading into the election trailing far behind Jimmy Carter, was swept into the White House on a wave of public concern of the Iranians taking US hostages. Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they're still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.

I remember the 80s, you don't. I started my business serving other businesses and it took off, along with many others. GDP went way up. You're flat out nuts. Ronnie is to blame for our bridges? Jesus, you need to get to a rehab center dude.

 

[Roudy]

Well of course the Bushes are taking Hillary's side here, after the humiliating way Trump mopped the floor with Jeb Bush's face during the primaries.

And you guys defended that name for 12 years. Amazing

Democratic and republican establishment are in bed with each other. This election proves that conclusively.

 

[sealybobo]

Well of course the Bushes are taking Hillary's side here, after the humiliating way Trump mopped the floor with Jeb Bush's face during the primaries.

And you guys defended that name for 12 years. Amazing

Democratic and republican establishment are in bed with each other. This election proves that conclusively.

But you aren't voting out Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell why? Because you want their legislation passed. Stop trying to bullshit me. You're still all republican douchbags.

 

[Alex.]

When you imagine partisan government overreach, it’s hard not to think about the Bush administration, especially when it comes to ignoring the law to accomplish their goals (think “enhanced interrogation”). When they tell the FBI they’ve gone too far, well, the FBI had better listen.
Bush Admin Just Got Involved In FBI’s Probe Into Clinton’s Emails And It’s Game Changing (IMAGE)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the time all this bs is done, we will be lucky to know who the hell we can trust at any Governmental level. We can be sure this lying, crooked bs has been going on for at least fifty years. It is just now coming to head.
Our guess, the internet is a way to gather so much information all at once, it makes it easy for these liars to get caught. Thanks to WIKILEAKS it solidifies what many already knew.

This isn't not one of my usual sources so what truth it holds right now could still make this information a determination factor for a later date.

LOL^^^^


"As a pro-business Republican, my vote is for ... Clinton
For economic reasons alone, she is our best bet for next 4 years.
By Richard W. Painter"

As a pro-business Republican, my vote is for ... Clinton



This bag of crap staked his claim on Clinton back in July 2016.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today.

LOL

Did I attack the god of your religion?

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts

Our bridges are falling apart (among other things), and its Ronald Reagan's fault.

But the rich fought back, and won big-time in 1980 when Reagan, until then the fringe "Voodoo economics" candidate who was heading into the election trailing far behind Jimmy Carter, was swept into the White House on a wave of public concern of the Iranians taking US hostages. Reagan promptly cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they're still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.

I remember the 80s, you don't. I started my business serving other businesses and it took off, along with many others. GDP went way up. You're flat out nuts. Ronnie is to blame for our bridges? Jesus, you need to get to a rehab center dude.

And noticed you let Ronnie spend? No wonder he was able to have more growth than Obama. Did you read the article I posted? Trump sounds like us in the 2000's.

 

[sealybobo]

When you imagine partisan government overreach, it’s hard not to think about the Bush administration, especially when it comes to ignoring the law to accomplish their goals (think “enhanced interrogation”). When they tell the FBI they’ve gone too far, well, the FBI had better listen.
Bush Admin Just Got Involved In FBI’s Probe Into Clinton’s Emails And It’s Game Changing (IMAGE)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the time all this bs is done, we will be lucky to know who the hell we can trust at any Governmental level. We can be sure this lying, crooked bs has been going on for at least fifty years. It is just now coming to head.
Our guess, the internet is a way to gather so much information all at once, it makes it easy for these liars to get caught. Thanks to WIKILEAKS it solidifies what many already knew.

This isn't not one of my usual sources so what truth it holds right now could still make this information a determination factor for a later date.

LOL^^^^


"As a pro-business Republican, my vote is for ... Clinton
For economic reasons alone, she is our best bet for next 4 years.
By Richard W. Painter"

As a pro-business Republican, my vote is for ... Clinton



This bag of crap staked his claim on Clinton back in July 2016.

Don't get mad when you don't like who they endorse. Just know they don't agree with you. Maybe you're POS.

 

[Alex.]

When you imagine partisan government overreach, it’s hard not to think about the Bush administration, especially when it comes to ignoring the law to accomplish their goals (think “enhanced interrogation”). When they tell the FBI they’ve gone too far, well, the FBI had better listen.
Bush Admin Just Got Involved In FBI’s Probe Into Clinton’s Emails And It’s Game Changing (IMAGE)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By the time all this bs is done, we will be lucky to know who the hell we can trust at any Governmental level. We can be sure this lying, crooked bs has been going on for at least fifty years. It is just now coming to head.
Our guess, the internet is a way to gather so much information all at once, it makes it easy for these liars to get caught. Thanks to WIKILEAKS it solidifies what many already knew.

This isn't not one of my usual sources so what truth it holds right now could still make this information a determination factor for a later date.

LOL^^^^


"As a pro-business Republican, my vote is for ... Clinton
For economic reasons alone, she is our best bet for next 4 years.
By Richard W. Painter"

As a pro-business Republican, my vote is for ... Clinton



This bag of crap staked his claim on Clinton back in July 2016.

Don't get mad when you don't like who they endorse. Just know they don't agree with you. Maybe you're POS.

I am not mad pinhead. I am having a freaking ball, this election season is the best evah.


Now go per yer puppy and leave the adults to discuss these matters.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Remember HW bush held on to the Iran hostages till after the election? That's why Reagan made him vp

Huh? Carter was president before Reagan and VP picks don't come after elections in this country.

Planned in advance. Everyone knows. Then Reagan Oliver north and bush sold guns to iran

You mean vs. the 150 billion dollars that obama just gave Iran for the 4 hostages.....and is allowing them to make nuclear weapons...you mean that Iran scandal where obama's Attorney General just took the 5th Amendment when testifying about the deal to congress....you mean like that?

Lets go to war with Iran. Good idea. You think Bush bankrupted the country? Trump is the king of bankruptcies. Says he will bankrupt America and renig on loan to China. Typical Trump move.

One Hostage, One Oilfield

How can he bankrupt us by doing that when he's going to seize all of Iran's oil?

 

[Roudy]

Well of course the Bushes are taking Hillary's side here, after the humiliating way Trump mopped the floor with Jeb Bush's face during the primaries.

And you guys defended that name for 12 years. Amazing

Democratic and republican establishment are in bed with each other. This election proves that conclusively.

But you aren't voting out Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell why? Because you want their legislation passed. Stop trying to bullshit me. You're still all republican douchbags.

People are coming around to the realizion that they've been bamboozled by both sides, and this election cycle has finally exposed just how rigged the system is.

Although, a republican is better than a left wing anti American commie dirtbag any day of the week.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Carter was a disaster; Reagan ushered in prosperity.

Reagan was the beginning of the end.

Prosperity, bro. 80's were great.

Yes but the policies Reagan set in motion in the 80's are still fucking us today. No doubt he was popular at the time but he's a piece of shit now looking back. Bringing in illegals, the middle east, breaking unions, sending jobs overseas, tax breaks for the rich.

Reagan wasn't perfect; and I'm not on the he could do no wrong conservative bandwagon. I just think compared to other 20th and 21st century presidents, he did a solid job at a minimum.

In addition to badly throwing the nation into debt, Reagan's tax cut blew out the ceiling on the accumulation of wealth, leading to a new Gilded Age and the rise of a generation of super-wealthy that hadn't been seen since the Robber Baron era of the 1890s or the Roaring 20s.

And, most tragically, Reagan's tax cuts caused America to stop investing in infrastructure. As a nation, we've been coasting since the early 1980s, living on borrowed money while we burn through (in some cases literally) the hospitals, roads, bridges, steam tunnels, and other infrastructure we built in the Golden Age of the Middle Class between the 1940s and the 1980s.

We even stopped investing in the intellectual infrastructure of this nation: college education. A degree that a student in the 1970s could have paid for by working as a waitress at a Howard Johnson's restaurant (what my wife did in the late 60s - I did so working as a near-minimum-wage DJ) now means incurring massive and life-altering debt for all but the very wealthy. Reagan, who as governor ended free tuition at the University of California, put into place the foundations for the explosion in college tuition we see today.

I had liberal professors tell me how rotten and atrocious Reagan was for his exploding of the debt, which is quite modest by more recent standards. Why is Reagan adding 1.5 trillion somehow the worst thing in the world, and Obama adding 10 trillion and counting not make hims so bad?

And you're feeding me a liberal line about tax cuts leading to spending cuts. That belies the reality, frankly.