Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

Posted
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.

 

 

Why Texas? 

Posted

Former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani has now been ordered to testify before a special grand jury in Fulton County, Georgia that is investigating former President Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

 

Via NPR's Stephen Fowler, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis sent out an order compelling Giuliani's appearance as a witness in the grand jury's investigation.

The order notes that Giuliani "failed to appear at a show cause hearing" that was supposed to take place earlier this month, and thus has left Willis no choice but to order his testimony on August 9th, 2022.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/rudy-giuliani-georgia-2657701786/

  • Like 2
Posted
1 hour ago, placeholder said:

What you don't acknowledge is that Trump increased the annual deficits when the economy was doing well thanks to his massive tax cuts.

"Economists agree that we needed massive deficit spending during the COVID-19 crisis to ward off an economic cataclysm, but federal finances under Trump had become dire even before the pandemic. That happened even though the economy was booming and unemployment was at historically low levels. By the Trump administration’s own description, the pre-pandemic national debt level was already a “crisis” and a “grave threat.”"

https://www.propublica.org/article/national-debt-trump

Why should I? The economy not doing well - since 2008 it was kept afloat by QE and low interest rates - now we can see the result of that.

  • Haha 1
Posted
25 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why should I? The economy not doing well - since 2008 it was kept afloat by QE and low interest rates - now we can see the result of that.

 Why should you? Because it's a fact, that's why. Trump massively raised the deficit when the economy was at full employment and tax revenues were going up.

As for your comment about the economy, another religious statement masquerading as an economic fact. Please share with us how the current situation is due to QE and low interest rates.

  • Like 2
Posted
57 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Your "fact". Not mine. Apart from Covid year, the average annual debt increase was higher under Obama than Trump. Some of that Fed balance increase (debt) was due to the regime of multiple sounds of QE (money printing) that initially worked to ease US markets in the aftermath of the 2008 GFC. The cumulative effect of QE has helped produce the high inflation we see today.  

Od course, it's a dishonest comparison as it includes the post crisis spendings at the beginning of Obama's first mandate. Now let's compare what is comparable (similar economic conditions). The average debt increase by Trump during the first two years pre-covid was 50% higher than the average increase during Obama's last mandate! ????

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
22 minutes ago, candide said:

Od course, it's a dishonest comparison as it includes the post crisis spendings at the beginning of Obama's first mandate. Now let's compare what is comparable (similar economic conditions). The average debt increase by Trump during the first two years pre-covid was 50% higher than the average increase during Obama's last mandate! ????

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

 

Why dishonest? The total numbers in your link agree with what I see but Trump's average overall was not 50% higher than Obama - I have to assume that you have selected "last mandate" as Obama's final 4-year term to fit your agenda.   

  • Like 2
Posted
10 minutes ago, placeholder said:

So the covid year is irrelevant but the fact that Obama inherited an economy that was under the greatest threat since the Great Depression is not relevant? Actually, the reason for QE is because, unlike the Democrats who responded to the emergency of covid, Republicans refused to increase spending to counter the depressed state of the economy. And just repeating that QE is responsible for current inflation does not make it true. You may have heard of Occam's razor. The simplest explanation that fits the facts is the best one. We have supply shortfalls due to covid and a war that has increased the cost of energy. Yet your explanation takes none of that into account. 

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, nauseus said:

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

Given shortfalls in production, and the Ukraine war, what do you suggest? And which administration are you referring to? The UK's? Germany's? France's? Inflation is rampant in virtually all the developed economies except Japan's. Oddly enough, their inflation rate is 2.5% despite the fact that their GDP to debt ratio is almost 3 times that of the USA.

Posted
48 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why dishonest? The total numbers in your link agree with what I see but Trump's average overall was not 50% higher than Obama - I have to assume that you have selected "last mandate" as Obama's final 4-year term to fit your agenda.   

You don't have to assume anything as I wrote myself it was during Obama's last mandate, as they were "normal" years without the post-crisis years which were atypical, just like the Covid years were atypical for Trump. There were similar economic conditions as during Trumps first two years.

 

Now if you want to play it stupid and consider that all years must be included, without thinking and paying attention to specific economic conditions, then we must compare Obama's two terms with Trump's full term. The average is 55% higher for Trump. ????

  • Like 2
Posted
3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Given shortfalls in production, and the Ukraine war, what do you suggest? And which administration are you referring to? The UK's? Germany's? France's? Inflation is rampant in virtually all the developed economies except Japan's. Oddly enough, their inflation rate is 2.5% despite the fact that their GDP to debt ratio is almost 3 times that of the USA.

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO2 across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
3 hours ago, candide said:

and global inflation started to rise befor

 

3 hours ago, candide said:

Right, global energy prices and global inflation started to rise before  the Ukraine war. In the U.S. it has been aggravated by the fast rate of job creation which induced wage increases, which then further fuelled inflation.

 

So, according to you, the government is doing little to fix it. What are the GOP practical proposals to fix it on short term? I didn't notice any.

I don't have any inside track or influence with the GOP. But simply giving the US oil industry the freedom to operate that it had 2-3 years ago, with guarantees of no restrictions in the near/mid term, should fix it.

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, candide said:

You don't have to assume anything as I wrote myself it was during Obama's last mandate, as they were "normal" years without the post-crisis years which were atypical, just like the Covid years were atypical for Trump. There were similar economic conditions as during Trumps first two years.

 

Now if you want to play it stupid and consider that all years must be included, without thinking and paying attention to specific economic conditions, then we must compare Obama's two terms with Trump's full term. The average is 55% higher for Trump. ????

It's obvious that far more money was used to battle Covid. 

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, nauseus said:

 

I don't have any inside track or influence with the GOP. But simply giving the US oil industry the freedom to operate that it had 2-3 years ago, with guarantees of no restrictions in the near/mid term, should fix it.

Energy prices are global. It is not a limited increase in U.S. production which will solve the current problem. It also takes time to develop new production drills, so the additional production will come too late on the market. On top of it, the future price of oil may not allow new investment to be profitable and operators know it.

  • Like 1
Posted
15 minutes ago, candide said:

Energy prices are global. It is not a limited increase in U.S. production which will solve the current problem. It also takes time to develop new production drills, so the additional production will come too late on the market. On top of it, the future price of oil may not allow new investment to be profitable and operators know it.

Takes time. Yes. So they need to get on with it, before Joe sells the rest of the strategic reserve.

  • Like 2
Posted
32 minutes ago, nauseus said:

It's obvious that far more money was used to battle Covid. 

It's true, but the 2008 crisis wasn't ridiculous either. 

Posted
5 hours ago, nauseus said:

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO2 across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

Actually, the US is a net producer of oil and gas. Oil and gas companies vastly increased their drilling rights during the Trump administrations thanks to a fire sale of those rights by the Trump administration. So there is no lack of reserves to be drilled.                               

  • Like 2
Posted
10 hours ago, nauseus said:

It is relevant, that's why I mentioned it. So is Covid. Energy prices and inflation were rising well before the war started - yes they are even worse since February but war is not the sole cause of this inflation - what is worse is that this US administration is doing little to fix it.

 

\

The "fix" for inflation is an economic slowdown, which can be brought about by higher interest rates and/or increased taxes.  Interest rates are already higher.  Are you advocating for tax increases?

 

Or perhaps you want to try the Republican's last attempt at fixing inflation; President Nixon's Wage and Price freeze, a.k.a Republican Socialism.

  • Like 2
Posted
5 hours ago, nauseus said:

I am referring to Joe Biden's "administration", which needs to change several policies, especially relating to US energy production. Why do you think his domestic approval ratings are so low now? Lower fuel prices will lower prices of everything and are possible.

 

Fix the shortfalls in US production first, then Europe and elsewhere will improve too, although Europe is far more affected by the war than the US. 

 

If America is to continue using oil, then they can and should use their own energy and so cut out any need for desperate Saudi trips. Much better for Joe's image for him to stay at home than take off on AF1 with its enormous escort, depositing even more CO2 across the northern hemisphere skies... for nothing.

If high oil prices cause inflation, then why was inflation low in 2011 and 2012 when oil prices were comparable to now?  https://www.thebalance.com/oil-price-history-3306200

 

Also, nothing the Biden administration is doing is preventing oil companies from increasing production now.  What's even more informative is that today's high prices also aren't tempting these companies into increasing production.  That's because any production increase will take billions in investment and take months if not years to show any results. 

 

As I've posted before, the oil companies know that today's high prices may prove to be oil's last great moment before declining into irrelevance in the energy market.  For that reason they aren't going to make big investments that can result in stranded assets. 

 

Nothing short of heavy handed government interference in the market will change that.  Do you advocate such a socialist approach?

  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...