Donald Trump stalwarts finally turn on him after Hutchinson's testimony

[ozimoron]

Just now, Hanaguma said:

Uh, it looks to me like your graphs actually prove my point.

 

Inflation in 2017 was 2.13%, 2018 was 2.44%, 2019 was 1.81%, 2020 was 1.23%.

 

Unemployment? 2017 was 4.36%, 2018 was 3.9%, 2019 was 3.67%, 2020 was 8.31% (thanks Covid).

 

And thanks to fracking and exploration, as you said in 2019 the US became an energy exporter.  Biden OTOH is an enemy of the energy sector. That is what he promised in his election campaign and what he is doing. 

 

So I am really not sure what you think you are proving with your graphs, other than that I was right...

Bit of a Feudian slip there, green energy is also part of the energy sector. There are far more jobs in green energy than coal.

[Jingthing]

I just learned that the potential Georgia case against citizen Trump probably the most clear cut slam dunk case that can be brought (among many) is a FEDERAL crlme.

 

So sorry to disapoint but if Citizen Trump is convicted on the Georgia case he won't be working on the chain gang delicious as that would be but could be sent to a Club Fed.

Edited July 3, 2022 by Jingthing

[candide]

29 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Uh, it looks to me like your graphs actually prove my point.

 

Inflation in 2017 was 2.13%, 2018 was 2.44%, 2019 was 1.81%, 2020 was 1.23%.

 

Unemployment? 2017 was 4.36%, 2018 was 3.9%, 2019 was 3.67%, 2020 was 8.31% (thanks Covid).

 

And thanks to fracking and exploration, as you said in 2019 the US became an energy exporter.  Biden OTOH is an enemy of the energy sector. That is what he promised in his election campaign and what he is doing. 

 

So I am really not sure what you think you are proving with your graphs, other than that I was right...

Yes, inflation is higher now but Biden is not responsible for the global energy prices and global supply problems (just as Trump was not responsible for the Covid-19 pandemic).

 

The unemployment rate is more interesting. Trump inherited an economy which had enjoyed steady growth for years, while Biden inherited the post-Covid economy. Two facts may be outlined:

- the U.S. has quickly created a record number of jobs under Biden and the unemployment is now in the same range as pre-Covid.

- the rate of unemployment decrease under Trump (pre-Covid) was better during Obama's last term. Despite Trump increasing debt and budget deficit thanks to tax cuts.

 

You are right about energy independence. However, the increase in energy production (and the related decrease of imports) did not start with Trump. Actually there was more progress made during Obama's tenure.

"U.S. net imports have been declining since 2005 as a result of hydraulic fracturing. That year, U.S. net imports of petroleum and petroleum products (e.g., gasoline, diesel, jet fuel) averaged 12.5 million barrels per day (BPD). By the time President Obama left office, the number had declined to 4.8 million BPD (Source). During Obama’s last full month in office, the number was 4.2 million BPD."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2022/03/08/surprise-the-us-is-still-energy-independent/?sh=b7b30d230b66

 

[placeholder]

47 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Uh, it looks to me like your graphs actually prove my point.

 

Inflation in 2017 was 2.13%, 2018 was 2.44%, 2019 was 1.81%, 2020 was 1.23%.

 

Unemployment? 2017 was 4.36%, 2018 was 3.9%, 2019 was 3.67%, 2020 was 8.31% (thanks Covid).

 

And thanks to fracking and exploration, as you said in 2019 the US became an energy exporter.  Biden OTOH is an enemy of the energy sector. That is what he promised in his election campaign and what he is doing. 

 

So I am really not sure what you think you are proving with your graphs, other than that I was right...

 

First off you claimed that the US became a net energy exporter in 2021. That is false, It became a net energy exporter in 2019.

But inflation was also at 2 percent for most of the last 4 years of obama's presidency

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi

 

As for unemployment. What don't you understand about trends? It wasn't as though there was a sharp decline in unemployment under Trump. The slope just continued downward. If he had accomplished something real in that regard, the slope would have changed. It didn't.

[placeholder]

5 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Yeah, that whole "pandemic" thing might have had a bit to do with it.  But 3 years of 2% inflation and sub 4% unemployment were fab. Plus the US becoming a net exporter of energy thanks to increased production, fracking, etc.  Plus midEast peace deals. Plus criminal justic reform....

It's funny. Obama inherited the worst recession since the Great Depression. Yet right wingers consistently blame him for the damage done to the economy.  But somehow, the rules are different for Covid's effect on the economy. In that case, not Trump's fault.

[billd766]

On 7/3/2022 at 9:02 AM, placeholder said:

Are you seriously suggesting that a witness has to have perfect recall to testify about what was said? It is to laugh.

If anybody can speak all sides of a conversation word perfectly held less than a week ago, I am very impressed.

 

Hayaguma seems to be under the impression that HE is running the investigation and not the committee that was set up to do so.

 

If he has a problem with those who testify then take it to the committee who do have the power to do something, not to an English language forum who don't have enough combined power to turn on a 2 watt light bulb .

 

[billd766]

3 hours ago, ozimoron said:

where's the competing testimonies? Talking a big game to the media doesn't cut it, raising your right hand does.

But to testify under oath leaves you open to legal penalties if you are found to have lied.

 

Also in my mind anyway, to take the 5th amendment means that you re guilty of something that may or will incriminate you.

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, billd766 said:

But to testify under oath leaves you open to legal penalties if you are found to have lied.

 

Also in my mind anyway, to take the 5th amendment means that you re guilty of something that may or will incriminate you.

Taking the 5th is a right but you can't control what people will think of those that do.

 

 

[billd766]

17 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Taking the 5th is a right but you can't control what people will think of those that do.

 

 

And now it is coming back to bite him on the a&&.

 

[nauseus]

On 7/1/2022 at 11:44 PM, Slip said:

I'm sure you can post plenty of evidence of her testimony being riddled with what you claim.  Well, no, not really.  You are far from a skilled propagandist.

I think the phrase in question was used 5x but you should watch it and see.

[Jingthing]

On 7/2/2022 at 12:11 AM, ozimoron said:

I'm still waiting for anybody to have have the cohones to front the House and refute this courageous young lady's testament under oath.

So what?!?

Do you honestly think that matters even one bit?

 

You know perfectly well almost nobody has a photographic memory.

It was her very credible way of expressing I don't remember the exact words but to the best of my recollection this is the gist of what was said.

 

She's a witness. Not a God.

Others are welcome to appear UNDER OATH and give their accounts to confirm or not.

 

[Jingthing]

24 minutes ago, nauseus said:

I think the phrase in question was used 5x but you should watch it and see.

What difference does it make 5 or 100? 

[pomchop]

11 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well there you go.

 

The attack of January 6 was a Democrat distraction show.

and remember the fox news and republican talking points was that the rioters were not trumpers but antifa and blm thugs....really...so trump was ok going to the capitol where a bunch of ARMED antifa and blm thugs would have likely shot him?  i somehow must have missed the fox and trump retraction on that BIG LIE that mob was not trumpers...

 

It is truly amazing how deep down the rabbit hole trumpers still go to try and justify the coup and stand by dear leader and ignore what is plain to see if they would only open their eyes and admit they got conned, fooled, lied to, tricked ...there is no shame in admitting you were wrong and got conned by the biggest con man in history......i won't hold my breath

 

Just try and imagine if Hillary had claimed fraud and tried to get VP biden to throw out the 2016 results?  The electoral results that were exactly the same as in 2020?  but no she conceded and passed power peacefully to trump without whining and throwing temper tantrums like a 2 y.o who didn't get his way....

[candide]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

What difference does it make 5 or 100? 

It's because he has no other argument.

[Credo]

I do believe that some people have been watching too much television.  This investigation is real life.  Cassidy Hutchinson did not, would not and would have been advised by her attorney to paraphrase anything she could not objectively prove as a direct quote.   There is way too much room for error in making quoting.   

 

Every statement she has made is subject to being disputed.  All those who were present have to do is to go to the committee and testify, under oath.  As a matter of fact, some have been subpoenaed and refused to testify.  Others have pleaded the 5th.  Hmmm. ..... who to believe?

 

So, just as an example, she described a scuffle in the vehicle when Trump wanted to go to the Capitol and the Secret Service declined.  It doesn't matter whether there was a physical confrontation or not.  That only matters if the agent takes to his superiors as some sort of assault.   What does matter is that he wanted to go.  He was irritated, as reported by multiple sources, and that he had already been informed they had weapons.  That is the basis of a potential charge.

[pomchop]

1 hour ago, Credo said:

I do believe that some people have been watching too much television.  This investigation is real life.  Cassidy Hutchinson did not, would not and would have been advised by her attorney to paraphrase anything she could not objectively prove as a direct quote.   There is way too much room for error in making quoting.   

 

Every statement she has made is subject to being disputed.  All those who were present have to do is to go to the committee and testify, under oath.  As a matter of fact, some have been subpoenaed and refused to testify.  Others have pleaded the 5th.  Hmmm. ..... who to believe?

 

So, just as an example, she described a scuffle in the vehicle when Trump wanted to go to the Capitol and the Secret Service declined.  It doesn't matter whether there was a physical confrontation or not.  That only matters if the agent takes to his superiors as some sort of assault.   What does matter is that he wanted to go.  He was irritated, as reported by multiple sources, and that he had already been informed they had weapons.  That is the basis of a potential charge.

Refuse to believe anything that does not jive with their view of dear leader.  Just watch fox news, whine about Hillary / Biden/ Obama and defend the indefensible rather than man up and admit they got conned.  Meantime trump continues to suck millions of dollars out of the cult and make them look like total rubes.  Truly amazing.  Makes Jim Jones look like a rookie at the kool aide biz.

[bendejo]

10 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I just learned that the potential Georgia case against citizen Trump probably the most clear cut slam dunk case that can be brought (among many) is a FEDERAL crlme.

So sorry to disapoint but if Citizen Trump is convicted on the Georgia case he won't be working on the chain gang delicious as that would be but could be sent to a Club Fed.

Any chance of this happening before November 2024?  If not, all these "unprecedented actions against a sitting president" can be back in play.  Even if he is not back in the WH but another GOP member is then fuggetabou.  Unless its Liz C.

 

 

[Jingthing]

28 minutes ago, bendejo said:

Any chance of this happening before November 2024?  If not, all these "unprecedented actions against a sitting president" can be back in play.  Even if he is not back in the WH but another GOP member is then fuggetabou.  Unless its Liz C.

 

 

Yes of course. A good chance.

[bendejo]

Adverse inference.

By refusing to answer on the grounds you may incriminate yourself you are implying that you may have committed a crime.

By seeking a pardon it means you know you need one, but does not qualify as a confession. 

In either case this is like the old situation of the police searching you and while they find no controlled substances they do find a packet of rolling papers.  This tells them that if they look harder they just might find something.

 

"Mr Flynn, do you believe in the peaceful transfer of power?"

"FIFTH!"

 

Myself, I am of little hope.  As much as it pains me to say, what hope I have hinges on Liz C.  I think she is the impetus behind the hearings, and I suspect she is prodding Benny in the ribs to keep things moving.  The Dem politicians seem to have this attitude that victory means losing by a smaller than expected margin.  They can learn a lot from the Lincoln Project.  Here it is from my favorite Democrat:

Quote

Democratic strategist James Carville praised the group for being more efficient and aggressive than Democratic PACs, saying: "Let me tell you, the Lincoln group and The Bulwark, these Never Trumper Republicans, the Democrats could learn a lot from them. They're mean. They fight hard. And we don't fight like that." The New Republic wrote that "they make punches that Democratic officials and operatives often seem inclined to pull"

They fight hard. And we don't fight like that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lincoln_Project

 

Keep the faith, baby.
 

[Scott]

A post about political polls has been removed.  Please stay on topic.  

 

[Credo]

Here's a little about the credibility of the Secret Service agent:

 

Two former White House aides say top Secret Service official defending Trump on Jan. 6 has history of lying

 

Two former White House aides say top Secret Service official defending Trump on Jan. 6 has history of lying

Josh Meyer and Ledyard King, USA TODAY

Sun, July 3, 2022 at 5:02 AM

 

 

Two former Trump White House aides are accusing a top Secret Service official and key defender of the then-president's actions during the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection of being a political loyalist with a history of lying.

Former aides Olivia Troye and Alyssa Farah Griffin have criticized the Secret Service official, Anthony Ornato, amid reports he is disputing that an angry Donald Trump grabbed the steering wheel of his presidential SUV limousine and lunged at a Secret Service agent in the front seat that day. Those explosive allegations were leveled last week by another ex-Trump aide, Cassidy Hutchinson, before the Select Committee investigating the Capitol attack.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/two-former-white-house-aides-100012762.html

 

[Eric Loh]

7 hours ago, bendejo said:

Any chance of this happening before November 2024?  If not, all these "unprecedented actions against a sitting president" can be back in play.  Even if he is not back in the WH but another GOP member is then fuggetabou.  Unless its Liz C.

 

 

The US Constitution does not state that a criminal indictment or conviction prevents someone from running for president. However in a separate section of the constitution bans federal office holders who engage in insurrection or rebellion off the ballot. Hope that section will come into play and lock him up for good. He will probably be pardoned by a deplorable GOP President.

[pomchop]

21 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The US Constitution does not state that a criminal indictment or conviction prevents someone from running for president. However in a separate section of the constitution bans federal office holders who engage in insurrection or rebellion off the ballot. Hope that section will come into play and lock him up for good. He will probably be pardoned by a deplorable GOP President.

or get a hung jury when a trumper lies about being impartial to get on jury...which of course means cheetoh and the cult would be blabbing forever about how he was found completely innocent

[nauseus]

12 hours ago, Jingthing said:

What difference does it make 5 or 100? 

95

[candide]

Thursday's hearings will be interesting. Let's see how much of Hutchinson's testimony (disparaged as hearsay by the MAGA guys) will be confirmed by Cipollone. ????

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3561779-ex-trump-counsel-gears-up-for-starring-appearance-in-jan-6-hearing/

[placeholder]

Do you think Trump's accusations are really a cry for help? That he wants to be arrested? I offer this in support of that thesis:

Trump called a top Wisconsin election official last week urging him to decertify Biden's 2020 election win in the state — in the midst of the January 6 hearings into the former president's efforts to overturn the election

The Wisconsin Assembly Speaker said Trump urged him to decertify Biden's win earlier this month.

Robin Vos told WISN-TV 12 News that Trump raised the topic following a state Supreme Court ruling on ballot boxes.

When Vos refused, Trump took to social media to slam the election official.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-called-top-wisconsin-election-014425625.html

[ozimoron]

On 7/4/2022 at 2:30 AM, Credo said:

I do believe that some people have been watching too much television.  This investigation is real life.  Cassidy Hutchinson did not, would not and would have been advised by her attorney to paraphrase anything she could not objectively prove as a direct quote.   There is way too much room for error in making quoting.   

 

Every statement she has made is subject to being disputed.  All those who were present have to do is to go to the committee and testify, under oath.  As a matter of fact, some have been subpoenaed and refused to testify.  Others have pleaded the 5th.  Hmmm. ..... who to believe?

 

So, just as an example, she described a scuffle in the vehicle when Trump wanted to go to the Capitol and the Secret Service declined.  It doesn't matter whether there was a physical confrontation or not.  That only matters if the agent takes to his superiors as some sort of assault.   What does matter is that he wanted to go.  He was irritated, as reported by multiple sources, and that he had already been informed they had weapons.  That is the basis of a potential charge.

Furthermore, her testimony is strongly bolstered by the secret service's deletion of the texts, subsequent inability to recover them, failure to punish those responsible and refusal to counter her testimony under oath.

[candide]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Do you think Trump's accusations are really a cry for help? That he wants to be arrested? I offer this in support of that thesis:

Trump called a top Wisconsin election official last week urging him to decertify Biden's 2020 election win in the state — in the midst of the January 6 hearings into the former president's efforts to overturn the election

The Wisconsin Assembly Speaker said Trump urged him to decertify Biden's win earlier this month.

Robin Vos told WISN-TV 12 News that Trump raised the topic following a state Supreme Court ruling on ballot boxes.

When Vos refused, Trump took to social media to slam the election official.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-called-top-wisconsin-election-014425625.html

The moron will never stop! ????

Quote from the article:

"Vos told WISN-TV that the July 10 court decision regarding ballot drop boxes would have an effect on the law moving forward and couldn't be applied retroactively."

 

Is Trump so stupid that he cannot understand that a law cannot be applied retroactively? Or is he just relying on the stupidity of his fans?

[ballpoint]

1 hour ago, candide said:

The moron will never stop! ????

Quote from the article:

"Vos told WISN-TV that the July 10 court decision regarding ballot drop boxes would have an effect on the law moving forward and couldn't be applied retroactively."

 

Is Trump so stupid that he cannot understand that a law cannot be applied retroactively? Or is he just relying on the stupidity of his fans?

The problem is, even when his fans know he's lying, they'll still support him.  Bob Woodward tells how he asked 20 - 25 Midlands, Texas, Republican voters if they believed that the 2020 election was stolen - none of them did.  He then asked them if, given the chance, they'd vote for Trump again - all of them indicated they would.

 

 

[ozimoron]

29 minutes ago, ballpoint said:

The problem is, even when his fans know he's lying, they'll still support him.  Bob Woodward tells how he asked 20 - 25 Midlands, Texas, Republican voters if they believed that the 2020 election was stolen - none of them did.  He then asked them if, given the chance, they'd vote for Trump again - all of them indicated they would.

That's because, right or wrong, truth or lies, Trump gives voice to their racist, white privilege agenda of anti immigration and anti globalist policies. They understand that a popular vote win is outside their grasp now and so embrace fascism as the only path to political power. Bottom line, the more wack job his conspiracy theories and lies are the less they need to defend them with truth and logic. None of them believe the lies and they don't care.

 

The playbook has been written now, started under Dubbya and completed under Trump. Others now see they can follow the recipe and play it smarter than Trump. We are headed for another 1930's both politically and economically.

Edited July 20, 2022 by ozimoron