Dow close on 1/20/1981 (RR 1st day) = 950
Dow close on 1/20/1989 (RR last day) = 3,256
Source: Bloomberg market quote
Dow close on 1/20/1989 (RR last day) = 3,256
Source: Bloomberg market quote
-
-
-
-
Let's take a walk down memory lane and remember a few times Trump trashed the jobs numbers as "fake," incomplete or something other than the right way to determine whether America had been made "great again."
Sep. 7, 2012
"Unemployment rate only dropped because more people are out of labor force & have stopped looking for work. Not a real recovery, phony numbers"
Oct. 19, 2012
"7.8% unemployment number is a complete fraud as evidenced by the jobless claims number released yesterday. Real unemployment is at least 15%"
Aug. 11, 2013
"We can rev up this economy like it should be, not with false numbers like 7.4 percent unemployment. But with real numbers."
May 31, 2014
"Unemployment is a totally phony number."
June 16, 2015
"Our real unemployment is anywhere from 18 to 20 percent. Don't believe the 5.6. Don't believe it."
Aug. 11, 2015
"Then you hear there's a 5.4 percent unemployment. It's really — if you add it up, it's probably 40 percent if you think about it."
Aug. 30, 2015
"They show those phony statistics where we are 5.4 percent unemployment. The real number, I saw a number that could be 42 percent, believe it or not."
Sept. 28, 2015
"I hear 5.3 percent unemployment, that is the biggest joke there is in this country. That number is so false."
Sept. 29, 2015
"The number is not reflective. I have seen numbers of 24 percent. I saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. … That number is so false."
Oct. 9, 2015
"They say 5.3 percent employment. The number is probably 32 percent."
Oct. 11, 2015
"Nobody has jobs. … It is not a real economy. It is a phony set of numbers. They cooked the books."
Jan. 17, 2016
"Look again, you hear these phony jobs numbers? People that gave up looking for jobs? They are considered employed."
Feb. 9, 2016
"Don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5 percent unemployment. As high as 35 — as in fact, I heard recently, 42 percent."
March 12, 2016
"The numbers are phony. These are all phony numbers. Numbers given to politicians to look good. These are phony numbers."
May 24, 2016
"You hear a 5 percent unemployment rate. It's such a phony number. That number was put in for presidents and for politicians so that they look good to the people."
July 7, 2016
"The phony 5 percent numbers that we hear about with the unemployment."
Aug. 8, 2016
"The 5 percent figure is one of the biggest hoaxes in modern politics."
Nov. 4, 2016
"The terrible jobs report that just came out … you can see phony numbers, 5 percent."
Dec. 8, 2016
"The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction."Comment
-
Your investments didnt kill it under Obama??Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
Dow close on 1/20/2009 (BO 1st day) = 7,949
Dow close on 1/20/2017 (BO last day) = 19,732
Source: Bloomberg market quoteComment
-
-
Oh yeah they did baby!!! That’s to the federal reserve.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
-
-
[
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
Dow close on 1/20/2001 (GWB 1st day) = 10,588
Dow close on 1/20/20O9 (GWB last day) = 7,949
Source: Bloomberg market quote
QUOTE=Unregistered;2171638]No qe
No qe
No qe[/QUOTE]
Bush should have tried the qe. So much money lost with him.Comment
-
It’s actually embarrassing to watch these Republicans Senators and House members protecting him on TV. It’s so obvious with all the events , actions and things Trump says to divert this investigation he’s Hiding something.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
And what about the other side of the aisle? This is really obvious .Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
" hiding something " we have heard it for over a year, but that " something" appears to be so elusive.
Democrats have been quoting from the infamous anti-Trump “Steele dossier” as if it were gospel, but now that Hillary Clinton has been revealed as its paymaster and a Hillary-friendly FBI is under investigation for possibly launching the Trump-Russia “collusion” probe under its false pretenses, they are suddenly in full retreat from it.
Their credibility is in tatters along with the discredited document.
Rep. Adam Schiff, who’s led the Democrats’ “collusion” inquisition as vice chair of the House Intelligence Committee, fully embraced the dossier from the moment the panel kicked off a public hearing in March with then-FBI Director James Comey. The California Dem eagerly read into the record its unfounded criminal accusations against Trump campaign advisers.
Since then, Schiff has dramatically changed his tune to one of caution and even regret: “I certainly would have liked to know who paid for it earlier.”
And he admits it “still remains to be seen” if the gossip against former Trump adviser Carter Page he read aloud and broadcast to the world, with McCarthyite relish, is actually true. In a recent closed-door meeting with Schiff, Page denied under oath the dossier’s claim that he met with two Kremlin officials to end US sanctions on Russia in exchange for bribes.
Also beating a hasty retreat from the dossier is Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), a colleague of Schiff’s on the House Intelligence Committee.
“There may very well be errors in the dossier,” Himes conceded Wednesday to CNN, even though he had also cited the document repeatedly and vouched for its contents.
Over in the Senate, Democrat Mark Warner, who’s been leading the effort in that chamber to frame Trump as a Kremlin-backed traitor, is suddenly having reservations about the dossier he previously touted
“Much of it still remains a real question of whether it is true or not,” the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, adding, “It’s obviously very inflammatory.”
Democrats’ new mission is to bury the dossier, and the media are providing them the shovel.
The New York Times now reports “it was not [the dossier]” but other factors, including a tip from an Australian diplomat, that triggered the Russia probe.
On cue, Democrats are using the report to help them downplay their own party’s opposition-research paper and make it look like the now-obvious political smears were never a big factor in their witch hunt, either.
Even the Democratic opposition-research firm Hillary hired is distancing itself from the dossier it subcontracted.
While Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS claims “we’re extremely proud of our work,” nowhere in his defensive op-ed in the Times earlier this week does he specifically defend that work. Astoundingly, he’s completely silent about the dossier’s core claim that ginned up this whole alleged scandal — that Trump officials and Russian intelligence worked together to hack the Democrats and spread stolen emails.
Instead, he changed the subject to “money laundering” and “financial ties,” which were never part of the “stolen election” narrative that Democrats have flogged to dog the presidency without end
“We don’t believe the Steele dossier was the trigger for the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling,” Simpson now maintains, even though the dossier’s author, ex-British spy Christopher Steele, worked closely with the FBI, while Simpson met with a top Justice official married to one of his researchers, to make sure the dossier’s wild allegations were taken seriously by investigators.
This is damage control.
What we have here is the miniaturization of the scandal as originally presented. The conspiracy-mongers are receding and retracting from their original accusations and smears in a fit of anxiety over what Congress will uncover about the Obama Justice Department’s reliance on this Democrat-underwritten dossier.
Its shameless Democratic promoters got everyone lathered up over a false conspiracy theory, and now they’re realizing they overreached and are running for the exits, revising history, recasting narratives, covering their keisters.
They led the nation on a wild goose chase, and now they fear the reckoning
Paul SperryComment
-
I love Paul Soerry
In "Crude Politics," Paul Sperry presents alarming evidence that the Bush administration diplomats resumed talks with Pakistani officials over gas and oil pipelines in Afghanistan while the United States was still reeling from the horror of September 11, 2001.
Paul Sperry contends that, true to America's energy-based foreign policy of the last half-century, the Bush administration seized the opportunity to use the attacks as reason to oust the Taliban-the major obstacle blocking plans for the precious pipelines linking Caspian reserves to hot Asian markets. With journalistic integrity and painstaking research, Sperry will enlighten readers on:
How commercial gain within the current oil-friendly administration has undermined our nation's war on terror.
How our safety has been jeopardized because of an overriding effort to charge ahead with a new "Silk Road" through Afghanistan, making the capture of Osama bin Laden a secondary concern.
The nature of war and the politics behind the major decisions being made in the current administration, including those regarding Iraq and other "axis of evil" countries.
Crude Politics also pulls back the veil on Bush's behind-scenes operator for regime change in both Afghanistan and Iraq -- former energy consultant Zal Khalilzad.Comment
-
Yes, I don't recall seeing him on CNN and MSNBC , but stay focused. He puts it out there , shows what is really going on. This " resistance" is deeper, much deeper than just a mere word.Originally posted by Unregistered View PostComment
-
Agreed.Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
Paul Sperry: ‘28 Pages’ Are a ‘Smoking Gun’ Linking 9/11 Hijackers to Bush Family Friend - Breitbart
The New York Post’s Paul Sperry discussed his analysis of the declassified “28 Pages” from the 9/11 report on Breitbart News Sunday with host Stephen K. Bannon. As the title of Sperry’s article puts it: “Yes, the Saudi Government Helped the 9/11 Terrorists.”
“It’s a smoking gun, because the linkages are so numerous, and strong, and reinforcing, that it’s hard to come away from reading all this material and not feel that there was a support network,” said Sperry.
He said the media is underplaying these revelations because “they haven’t bothered to read it, and they took the pre-release spin from the White House, and from the Saudis, and K Street, all the K Street lobbyists, and that’s what they went with, instead of actually investigating for themselves — which is typical of the lazy mainstream media.”Comment
Comment