Why Is The GOP Senate So Afraid To Call Witnesses??

[Meister]

Quid pro quo is not a crime. PERIOD

Soliciting a foreign national to help with Impeached Trump's campaign is a crime. Even if there was no quid pro quo.

That is funny, Faun.....That's not even what he was impeached for, and if it was as obvious to them as it is to you, they would have brought it forward. lol

Hate to mention it Mr Meister but the longer Pelosi waits the better the chance of finding more impeachable evidence Then Trump could have a double header ..1st president impeached in 1st term and 1st with a double impeachment

Another first was a bipartisan vote that went against the prosecuting party. Leaves a taint of political gamesmanship.
It just lowers the bar for impeachable offenses

bipartisan? with how many DINO's voted no? You're counting the one who changed parties?

After the vote he changed parties. How many defects does it take to make it bipartisan?

 

[edward37]

Soliciting a foreign national to help with Impeached Trump's campaign is a crime. Even if there was no quid pro quo.

That is funny, Faun.....That's not even what he was impeached for, and if it was as obvious to them as it is to you, they would have brought it forward. lol

Hate to mention it Mr Meister but the longer Pelosi waits the better the chance of finding more impeachable evidence Then Trump could have a double header ..1st president impeached in 1st term and 1st with a double impeachment

Another first was a bipartisan vote that went against the prosecuting party. Leaves a taint of political gamesmanship.
It just lowers the bar for impeachable offenses

bipartisan? with how many DINO's voted no? You're counting the one who changed parties?

After the vote he changed parties. How many defects does it take to make it bipartisan?

Guess the rule is just one but imho that's assinine

 

[Faun]

So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.

What crime has been committed?
Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
If they wanted witnesses they should have used the courts, but, they were in a hurry to a train wreck....and it did wreck for them.
Perhaps, in their next impeachment hoax with this president they will slow down.

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

And that "transcript" reveals Impeached Trump broke the law by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival.

Link?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

 

[Faun]

Perhaps the better thing, the more decent thing, would have been for the President to cooperate with the subpoenas from the Congress, as the Constitution sets forth.
If you are so sure the courts would force the President's men to testify, why are we going through this charade? He is obviously wrong and he knows it.

In all honesty, I believe the courts would have sided with Trump. There is no there, there. I believe that is exactly why the democrats
didn't want to use the courts like in the impeachment of Clinton. With Clinton there was an actual law broken.
Think this through without being so partisan.

In the case of the subpoenas, is it the court's job to establish the truth of the case, or just to determine if the President has the authority to ignore Congress's right to investigate the Executive?

Quid pro quo is not a crime. PERIOD

Soliciting a foreign national to help with Impeached Trump's campaign is a crime. Even if there was no quid pro quo.

That is funny, Faun.....That's not even what he was impeached for, and if it was as obvious to them as it is to you, they would have brought it forward. lol

Of course he was impeached for that....

IMPEACHMENT OF DONALD JOHN TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage.​

 

[Jitss617]

What crime has been committed?
Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
If they wanted witnesses they should have used the courts, but, they were in a hurry to a train wreck....and it did wreck for them.
Perhaps, in their next impeachment hoax with this president they will slow down.

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

And that "transcript" reveals Impeached Trump broke the law by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival.

Link?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

What’s your point?

 

[Faun]

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

And that "transcript" reveals Impeached Trump broke the law by soliciting a foreign national to investigate a political rival.

Link?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf

What’s your point?

Look up --it's the one sailing clear over your head, comrade.

 

[Meister]

In all honesty, I believe the courts would have sided with Trump. There is no there, there. I believe that is exactly why the democrats
didn't want to use the courts like in the impeachment of Clinton. With Clinton there was an actual law broken.
Think this through without being so partisan.

In the case of the subpoenas, is it the court's job to establish the truth of the case, or just to determine if the President has the authority to ignore Congress's right to investigate the Executive?

Quid pro quo is not a crime. PERIOD

Soliciting a foreign national to help with Impeached Trump's campaign is a crime. Even if there was no quid pro quo.

That is funny, Faun.....That's not even what he was impeached for, and if it was as obvious to them as it is to you, they would have brought it forward. lol

Of course he was impeached for that....

IMPEACHMENT OF DONALD JOHN TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

Using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States Presidential election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the Government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence the 2020 United States Presidential election to his advantage.​

Abuse of of Power, and Obstruction of Congress from the kangaroo court

 

[Superbadbrutha]

The unemployment rate was already about 8% when the stimulus was passed.

Obama's economic advisors promised that if given the stimulus that rate would drop to 6%...instead it rose to over 10%.

Again, the unemployment rate was higher than the ARRA predicted (December, 2008), than when ARRA was passed (February, 2009). And they predicted it would drop to 6% in 2012 and that happened in 2014.

That's five years later, Faun! ARRA didn't make the unemployment rate drop to 6% five years after it was passed! Those unemployment numbers were driven by things like the energy boom...things that Barry not only didn't DO but actively opposed!

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

 

[Oldstyle]

What crime has been committed?
Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
If they wanted witnesses they should have used the courts, but, they were in a hurry to a train wreck....and it did wreck for them.
Perhaps, in their next impeachment hoax with this president they will slow down.

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

As far as I'm concerned, there has been plenty of evidence presented and I agree that he should be impeached. And removed. However, a lot of lawyers who know about standards in court do not believe it is enough.

When you hold a gun to a man's chest and say "This is not a stickup, just give me all your money," it is still a stickup. Zelensky has several million good reasons to say whatever Trump wants him to say.

Trump stuck a gun to Zelensky's chest and demanded money? What are you babbling about?

Zelensky was requesting aid from the US. Trump granted him that aid. He also asked the President of the Ukraine to look into apparent corruption that had taken place there. He didn't ask him to make up things about Joe Biden like you liberals did to him in the previous election...he simply asked Zelensky to look into apparent corruption. Bottom line? Trump did nothing that ALL President's haven't done! Impeaching him over THIS is laughable!

Um, lying con tool, the Burisma case was settled and closed before Impeached Trump asked Zelensky to re-open it.

It was "settled"? What does that mean exactly? Does it mean that they investigated influence peddling between Burisma, Hunter and Joe Biden? If so...who was it that decided nothing untoward happened? The Ukraine had a well deserved reputation for corruption. Why would anyone trust in what was "settled" by politicians known to be corrupt?

 

[Oldstyle]

Obama's economic advisors promised that if given the stimulus that rate would drop to 6%...instead it rose to over 10%.

Again, the unemployment rate was higher than the ARRA predicted (December, 2008), than when ARRA was passed (February, 2009). And they predicted it would drop to 6% in 2012 and that happened in 2014.

That's five years later, Faun! ARRA didn't make the unemployment rate drop to 6% five years after it was passed! Those unemployment numbers were driven by things like the energy boom...things that Barry not only didn't DO but actively opposed!

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

Again, the unemployment rate was higher than the ARRA predicted (December, 2008), than when ARRA was passed (February, 2009). And they predicted it would drop to 6% in 2012 and that happened in 2014.

That's five years later, Faun! ARRA didn't make the unemployment rate drop to 6% five years after it was passed! Those unemployment numbers were driven by things like the energy boom...things that Barry not only didn't DO but actively opposed!

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

What's the difference you Trump Humpers claim that Trump is the Messiah. So how is it Pres. Obama had zero to do with low unemployment, but Trump has everything to do with it. Talk about having your head up your ass, because again a Trump Humper calling someone a "political hack" is a joke.

 

[Faun]

Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
Trump is stopping those who heard straight from the horses mouth from testifying. It is as simple as that and it doesn't take a genius to understand why he is doing it.

So you admit that there hasn't been evidence of any crime presented so far, Old Lady but you're convinced that suspending Executive Privilege for the Trump Administration will somehow unearth evidence that will? What do you base that on...I mean other than your obvious dislike for Trump?

As for getting the story straight from the horse's mouth? Trump released the transcript of the call. Can't get anymore direct than that. The President of the Ukraine has repeatedly denied there was any Quid Pro Quo in play. Can't get anymore first person than that. So what are YOU basing your accusations on? The parade of people Adam Schiff brought in who DIDN'T have first person knowledge of what took place? The panel of "academics" who's dislike of Trump seemed to be their only contribution to the proceedings?

As far as I'm concerned, there has been plenty of evidence presented and I agree that he should be impeached. And removed. However, a lot of lawyers who know about standards in court do not believe it is enough.

When you hold a gun to a man's chest and say "This is not a stickup, just give me all your money," it is still a stickup. Zelensky has several million good reasons to say whatever Trump wants him to say.

Trump stuck a gun to Zelensky's chest and demanded money? What are you babbling about?

Zelensky was requesting aid from the US. Trump granted him that aid. He also asked the President of the Ukraine to look into apparent corruption that had taken place there. He didn't ask him to make up things about Joe Biden like you liberals did to him in the previous election...he simply asked Zelensky to look into apparent corruption. Bottom line? Trump did nothing that ALL President's haven't done! Impeaching him over THIS is laughable!

Um, lying con tool, the Burisma case was settled and closed before Impeached Trump asked Zelensky to re-open it.

It was "settled"? What does that mean exactly? Does it mean that they investigated influence peddling between Burisma, Hunter and Joe Biden? If so...who was it that decided nothing untoward happened? The Ukraine had a well deserved reputation for corruption. Why would anyone trust in what was "settled" by politicians known to be corrupt?

It means they addressed all of the charges against Zlochevsky. They dropped money laundering but upheld tax evasion. They worked out a deal to collect back taxes from Zlochevsky, which he paid and Ukraine closed the investigation into Burisma.

 

[Faun]

Again, the unemployment rate was higher than the ARRA predicted (December, 2008), than when ARRA was passed (February, 2009). And they predicted it would drop to 6% in 2012 and that happened in 2014.

That's five years later, Faun! ARRA didn't make the unemployment rate drop to 6% five years after it was passed! Those unemployment numbers were driven by things like the energy boom...things that Barry not only didn't DO but actively opposed!

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

LOL

Spits the lying con tool who claims Impeached Trump created jobs without passing policies while he asks which Obama policies helped job growrh.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Most of the jobs that Obama created were in the private sector. Not dependent on tax dollars.

Most of the jobs that trump has created are low paying service jobs and jobs dependent on tax dollars in the military industrial complex.
.

Me thinks you have your presidents confused.

Most of OBAMA'S jobs were low paying jobs and unlike you, I have proof.

Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract

So while liars like Faun love to look at "jobs created" he'll put his fingers in his ears and his head up his ass when confronted about WHAT KIND OF JOBS.

Obama: part time menial work
Trump: Manufacturing

Manufacturers Added 6 Times More Jobs Under Trump Than Under Obama's Last 2 Years

Mining:

Construction:

This chart shows jobs in industries like mining and construction are thriving under Trump

 

[Oldstyle]

That's five years later, Faun! ARRA didn't make the unemployment rate drop to 6% five years after it was passed! Those unemployment numbers were driven by things like the energy boom...things that Barry not only didn't DO but actively opposed!

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

What's the difference you Trump Humpers claim that Trump is the Messiah. So how is it Pres. Obama had zero to do with low unemployment, but Trump has everything to do with it. Talk about having your head up your ass, because again a Trump Humper calling someone a "political hack" is a joke.

The difference between me and you two, Super...is that I can show exactly the policies that Trump has employed to created jobs and grow the economy. When I ask what policies Obama used to do the same thing...all I get from you two are the same stupid graphs that give him credit for things that he had nothing to do with.

 

[Oldstyle]

That's five years later, Faun! ARRA didn't make the unemployment rate drop to 6% five years after it was passed! Those unemployment numbers were driven by things like the energy boom...things that Barry not only didn't DO but actively opposed!

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

LOL

Spits the lying con tool who claims Impeached Trump created jobs without passing policies while he asks which Obama policies helped job growrh.

It's not rocket science, Faun! You want to create jobs? Get the government out of the business of business and amazing things happen! It's what you on the left can never seem to grasp. You can't legislate your way to economic growth. It's not going to happen. Trump understands that when government regulations become so burdensome that businesses spend more time complying with them then they do growing...it has to change.

 

[Faun]

Most of the jobs that Obama created were in the private sector. Not dependent on tax dollars.

Most of the jobs that trump has created are low paying service jobs and jobs dependent on tax dollars in the military industrial complex.
.

Me thinks you have your presidents confused.

Most of OBAMA'S jobs were low paying jobs and unlike you, I have proof.

Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract

So while liars like Faun love to look at "jobs created" he'll put his fingers in his ears and his head up his ass when confronted about WHAT KIND OF JOBS.

Obama: part time menial work
Trump: Manufacturing

Manufacturers Added 6 Times More Jobs Under Trump Than Under Obama's Last 2 Years

Mining:

Construction:

This chart shows jobs in industries like mining and construction are thriving under Trump

"Nearly 95% of all new jobs during Obama era were part-time, or contract"

Lying human scum, that was actually a study from 2005-2015. Obama was president from 2009-2017. Rendering that claim false as it includes 4 years under Bush, who produced the fewest jobs since Herbert Hoover, and it doesn't cover Obama's entire presidency.

Like I always say, if conservatives didn't lie, they'd have absolutely nothing to say.

 

[Faun]

Lying con tool, you were the one to point out ARRA predicted a return to 6% unemployment. I was the one to point out it predicted that would happen in 2012 and that unemployment due to Bush's Great Recession turned out to be greater than the ARRA expected, resulting in it taking 2 extra years to get back down to 6%.

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

What's the difference you Trump Humpers claim that Trump is the Messiah. So how is it Pres. Obama had zero to do with low unemployment, but Trump has everything to do with it. Talk about having your head up your ass, because again a Trump Humper calling someone a "political hack" is a joke.

The difference between me and you two, Super...is that I can show exactly the policies that Trump has employed to created jobs and grow the economy. When I ask what policies Obama used to do the same thing...all I get from you two are the same stupid graphs that give him credit for things that he had nothing to do with.

Lying con tool, aside from claiming Impeached Trump created jobs without passing any policies, all you're doing is saying Impeached Trumpxs policies he did pass added jobs but Obama's policies didn't.

That's just one of your vacuous positions that demonstrates you're a lying con tool.

 

[Oldstyle]

Once again...you clueless partisan hack! )) Obama and Pelosi assured us that the unemployment rate would rise above 8% if the ARRA wasn't approved but if it WAS then the unemployment rate would go down to 6% and do so quickly because of all the "shovel ready" jobs they were going to create!

So they got their money...did their stimulus package...and what happened? The unemployment rate went to over 10% and the whole "shovel ready" job thing never happened! That's what you progressives do to an economy when you're running things.

A Trump Humper calling anyone a Partisan Hack is comical.

Most of Faun's posts are comical! He's still here pretending that Barack Obama was an economic GENIUS! What does he back that up with? Graphs that show jobs were created while Barry's skinny ass was sitting behind a desk in the Oval Office...jobs that Obama had ZERO to do with creating...jobs that in most instances Obama tried to pass legislation that would have prevented from being created.

That's why I refer to him as a political hack.

What's the difference you Trump Humpers claim that Trump is the Messiah. So how is it Pres. Obama had zero to do with low unemployment, but Trump has everything to do with it. Talk about having your head up your ass, because again a Trump Humper calling someone a "political hack" is a joke.

The difference between me and you two, Super...is that I can show exactly the policies that Trump has employed to created jobs and grow the economy. When I ask what policies Obama used to do the same thing...all I get from you two are the same stupid graphs that give him credit for things that he had nothing to do with.

Lying con tool, aside from claiming Impeached Trump created jobs without passing any policies, all you're doing is saying Impeached Trumpxs policies he did pass added jobs but Obama's policies didn't.

That's just one of your vacuous positions that demonstrates you're a lying con tool.

You really don't have a response to the fact that Trump's economic policies WORK and Barry's didn't...do you, Faun? Other than your usual "Lying con tool" response which has you sounding more and more idiotic each time you use it? Now you think "Impeached Trump" is an argument winner? Pathetic as usual.

 

[Oldstyle]

You've got one President who's administration saddled the nation with record numbers of new regulations and one who came up with the simple yet brilliant strategy of requiring agencies to cut 2 regulations if they want to pass a new one.