Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
President Trump President Trump

02-15-2017 , 11:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mongidig
I think we have all heard about these stories.
The Conway "investigation" is a non starter. The Democrat supporters embracing Chaffetz and his investigations is pretty funny actually. If there is an ant-progressive in Congress it is him. He is carrying on with his investigation of HRC emails btw. The Dems will support that one I am sure LOL.

On what Mitch will do who knows. Flynn maintains he didn't do anything wrong. We'll see what turns up. Does PrecictIt have a line on a Flynn indictment over this?
02-15-2017 , 11:37 PM
Gathering shopping carts at the local grocery store is not a $10/hr job...it is barely a $5/hr job.

Just as pushing a button on a machine to fold boxes every once in a while at your local union factory job is not a $25/hr job...it is barely a $5/hr job

YAY UNIONS !!


#Imhoobv

Last edited by NoQuarter; 02-15-2017 at 11:42 PM.
02-16-2017 , 12:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
One afternoon, 3 investigations? The Trump White House’s ominous day.



This is one day in the Trump administration. Amazing.
Storm in a teacup goofy. It's all just speculation.

Until there is something concrete in the way of evidence it's nothing more than another example of "fake news", I'm afraid.
02-16-2017 , 12:09 AM
You mean like video of Conway giving a free commercial for Nordstrom and FB pics of the Korean incident or the transcripts of the phone calls Flynn made?
02-16-2017 , 12:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
You mean like video of Conway giving a free commercial for Nordstrom and FB pics of the Korean incident or the transcripts of the phone calls Flynn made?
You're not as smart as the FBI so I'm not sure why you wouldn't take their word for it.

“The FBI reviewed intercepts of communications between the Russian ambassador to the United States and retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn — national security adviser to then-President-elect Trump — but has not found any evidence of wrongdoing or illicit ties to the Russian government, U.S. officials said.”
02-16-2017 , 12:23 AM
1 source down like 18 to go.
02-16-2017 , 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
I think it is fair to state that the consensus among economists is that minimum wage increases cost people jobs and the people that lose the jobs are lower income earners.
Not really a consensus. From Wiki:

Quote:
A 2013 Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) review of multiple studies since 2000 indicated that there was "little or no employment response to modest increases in the minimum wage." The study indicated 11 reasons for this finding, the most important including: "reductions in labor turnover; improvements in organizational efficiency; reductions in wages of higher earners ('wage compression'); and small price increases."[45] Another CEPR study in 2014 found that job creation within the United States is faster within states that raised their minimum wage.[46] In 2014, the state with the highest minimum wage in the nation, Washington, exceeded the national average for job growth in the United States.[47]
The CBO also estimated the positive effects of minimum wage:

Quote:
CBO estimated in February 2014 that raising the minimum wage would reduce the number of persons below the poverty income threshold by 900,000 under the $10.10 option
Still, raising the federal minimum wage is probably a ham-handed way of helping low-skill workers. I'd be much happier with an increase in the Earned Income Credit.
02-16-2017 , 12:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
CBO On Minimum Wage
I think it is fair to state that the consensus among economists is that minimum wage increases cost people jobs and the people that lose the jobs are lower income earners.
Thanks for finding a citation! I'm sure pokerodox would be happy to rewrite his hypothetical now where instead of 300/1000 people losing their jobs, actually just 3/1000 people lose them while 997 have an increased standard of living. We can finally have an honest discussion!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
Until there is something concrete in the way of evidence
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
You mean like video of Conway giving a free commercial for Nordstrom and FB pics of the Korean incident or the transcripts of the phone calls Flynn made?
lol Sushy
02-16-2017 , 12:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by adios
The Democrat supporters embracing Chaffetz and his investigations is pretty funny actually. If there is an ant-progressive in Congress it is him. He is carrying on with his investigation of HRC emails btw. The Dems will support that one I am sure LOL.
This is a suuuuuuuuper dumb argument btw, like really really dumb. If a Democrat wanted to investigate the Trump administration you'd cry partisan bias, but we can't point out that even Republicans want to investigate Trump?
02-16-2017 , 02:48 PM
Trump bringing in an ally (who donated over a million dollars to a Trump-aligned PAC) to review intelligence agencies

Quote:
Mr. Bannon and Mr. Kushner, according to current and former intelligence officials and Republican lawmakers, had at one point considered Mr. Feinberg for either director of national intelligence or chief of the Central Intelligence Agency’s clandestine service, a role that is normally reserved for career intelligence officers, not friends of the president. Mr. Feinberg’s only experience with national security matters is his firm’s stakes in a private security company and two gun makers.
I guess "drain the swamp" actually meant "put my rich friends in positions they're totally unqualified for"
02-16-2017 , 02:57 PM


Oh, how times change: After Election, Trump’s Professed Love for Leaks Quickly Faded

Quote:
As a candidate for president, Donald J. Trump embraced the hackers who had leaked Hillary Clinton’s emails to the press, declaring at a rally in Pennsylvania, “I love WikiLeaks!”

To the cheering throngs that night, Mr. Trump marveled that “nothing is secret today when you talk about the internet.” The leakers, he said, had performed a public service by revealing what he called a scandal with no rival in United States history.

Now, after less than four weeks in the Oval Office, President Trump has changed his mind.
lol what a pathetic hypocrite
02-16-2017 , 03:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
That's some great news there btw, remember Trump being all like "maybe we'll just forget about this One China policy?" Xi made him bend the knee with no gain for the US on the other end. Trump making great deals, just the best deals, the best foreign policy.
It appears I wasn't quite accurate here, Trump did get something out of the deal.



LOL at the idiots who voted for this guy, he's spending US interests to get personal favors
02-16-2017 , 03:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Thanks for finding a citation! I'm sure pokerodox would be happy to rewrite his hypothetical now where instead of 300/1000 people losing their jobs, actually just 3/1000 people lose them while 997 have an increased standard of living. We can finally have an honest discussion!
Seriously?

Here's the quote:

"Once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent..."

Agreed that I guessed at the numbers (300 out of every 1000), but we are talking 500,000 workers out of those in the range to be effected, not 500,000 out of all U.S. workers. Feel free to do the research (admittedly, I don't have the exact numbers), and then show us why 500,000 newly unemployed workers are insignificant.
02-16-2017 , 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Agreed that I guessed at the numbers (300 out of every 1000)
Oh, you think?

That level of arrogance (hey I'm just gonna pull numbers totally out of my ass and make you tell me why I'm wrong) is what pissed me off about your post. Talk about "bias" and "fake news" and ****, jesus.
02-16-2017 , 03:29 PM
Judging by internet reactions, today's Trump presser was quite a doozy, wish I'd seen it!

02-16-2017 , 03:45 PM
Here's Trump talking about Flynn today:

Quote:
Mike Flynn is a fine person, and I asked for his resignation. He respectfully gave it. He is a man who there was a certain amount of information given to Vice President Pence, who is with us today. And I was not happy with the way that information was given.

He didn’t have to do that, because what he did wasn’t wrong — what he did in terms of the information he saw. What was wrong was the way that other people, including yourselves in this room, were given that information, because that was classified information that was given illegally. That’s the real problem.

And, you know, you can talk all you want about Russia, which was all a, you know, fake news, fabricated deal, to try and make up for the loss of the Democrats and the press plays right into it. In fact, I saw a couple of the people that were supposedly involved with all of this — that they know nothing about it; they weren’t in Russia; they never made a phone call to Russia; they never received a phone call.

It’s all fake news. It’s all fake news. The nice thing is, I see it starting to turn, where people are now looking at the illegal — I think it’s very important — the illegal, giving out classified information. It was — and let me just tell you, it was given out like so much.
To the extent that you can even pick out coherent thoughts from that jumble of words, which is plenty difficult to begin with - it seems like we have...
- Flynn didn't do anything wrong
- but I fired Flynn because of what he said to Pence
- but he didn't do anything wrong
- it's fake news, the media did something wrong

Did I miss anything there? Can any Trumpkins help translate this from Donaldese into English?
02-16-2017 , 03:47 PM
45's Bureau of Indian Affairs issued eviction notices to Native Americans today with a demand to vacate their land in 10 days or else.
02-16-2017 , 03:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Oh, you think?

That level of arrogance (hey I'm just gonna pull numbers totally out of my ass and make you tell me why I'm wrong) is what pissed me off about your post. Talk about "bias" and "fake news" and ****, jesus.
As far as a consensus you probably need to look up the definition of the word. The CBO is a reliable source and pretty much a consensus of economists don't have problems with the general idea. You'd have to pretty stupid to think increasing the minimum has no impact on the number of jobs in the economy. If raising the minimum wage has no negative impact on jobs then just raise it to $50 an hour.

Interested to here the goofyballer take on the minimum wage where it starts having a negative impact on jobs in the economy since you hold that a $10 an hour minimum has little effect,

My view is that a $15 an hour minimum has a larger negative impact on jobs than a $10 an hour minimum wage.
02-16-2017 , 04:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
Here's Trump talking about Flynn today:



To the extent that you can even pick out coherent thoughts from that jumble of words, which is plenty difficult to begin with - it seems like we have...
- Flynn didn't do anything wrong
- but I fired Flynn because of what he said to Pence
- but he didn't do anything wrong
- it's fake news, the media did something wrong

Did I miss anything there? Can any Trumpkins help translate this from Donaldese into English?
Sure. He's saying Flynn didn't do anything illegal but he misled the VP. So that's why he was fired.

All the other stuff about colluding with Russia, he is saying is fake news. Which is correct.

Anything else i can help you with, let me know.
02-16-2017 , 04:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
All the other stuff about colluding with Russia, he is saying is fake news. Which is correct.
I'm a little confused on this bit - I thought Flynn was fired for lying to Pence because Flynn said, untruthfully, that he didn't discuss sanctions with the Russians.

How is the Russia stuff fake news if Flynn lying about it to Pence is the reason why he was fired?

Thanks for the rest though, I do appreciate the translation help.
02-16-2017 , 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
I'm a little confused on this bit - I thought Flynn was fired for lying to Pence because Flynn said, untruthfully, that he didn't discuss sanctions with the Russians.

How is the Russia stuff fake news if Flynn lying about it to Pence is the reason why he was fired?

Thanks for the rest though, I do appreciate the translation help.
I was referring to the colluding with Russia pre-election, which is what Trump was referring to as well, I believe.

That's the fake news.
02-16-2017 , 04:59 PM
I guess that's what happens when Trump speaks so generally, you have to basically guess what he's talking about!
02-16-2017 , 05:18 PM
Regarding Trump and fake news, from today's press conference:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Trump
We got 306 because people came out and voted like they’ve never seen before so that’s the way it goes. I guess it was the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan.


Quote:
Q: You said today that you had the biggest electoral margin since Ronald Reagan with 304 or 306 electoral votes. In fact, President Obama got 365-

Trump: I was talking about Republicans.

Q: ...George H.W. Bush, 426 when he won as President. So why should Americans trust-

Trump: I was given that information, I don't know, I was just given - we had a very very big margin.

Q: I guess my question is, why should Americans trust you when you accuse the information they receive of being fake, when you're providing information that's not accurate?

Trump: Well I don't know, I was given that information. Actually I've seen that information around!
But it was a very substantial victory, do you agree with that?
LOL the president is a moron
02-16-2017 , 06:05 PM
LOCK HIM UP, LOCK HIM UP. Am I doing it right???:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.44fc66a06bae

      
m