Donald Trump and His Team of Morons
 

Scathing article by Paul Krugman in the not failing NYTs

It has a comical quote from one member of Trump's administration, who apparently does not understand what the wealthy do with their money that is such a benefit to the rest of us.

What Sean Hannity had to say about taxing the rich. What’s that? You say that Hannity isn’t a member of the Trump administration? But surely he is in every sense that matters. In fact, Fox News isn’t just state TV, its hosts clearly have better access to the president, more input into his decisions, than any of the so-called experts at places like the State Department or the Department of Defense.

Anyway, Hannity declared that raising taxes on the wealthy would damage the economy, because “rich people won’t be buying boats that they like recreationally,” and “they’re not going to be taking expensive vacations anymore.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/o...gtype=Homepage

Hannity is a supporting actor.

Everyone knows that Rush Limbaugh controls the White House.

Thanks for helping expose the truth,Pete.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Krugman said the US economy would never survive a Trump presidency.

He still has credibility to you? How wrong would he have to be, and how often, before you might conclude that he is the moron?

It has a comical quote from one member of Trump's administration, who apparently does not understand what the wealthy do with their money that is such a benefit to the rest of us.

as always, you ignored my point and dodged my question completely.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He's got two more years to be correct

how’s he doing so far, at this moment?

and if a recession comes in the next two years, as everyone predicts, is that necessarily trumps fault?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is Jeff on his team now?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are you saying that Krugman said the economy would not survive the first two years of Trump, that’s not what you just said
Just like all the past two years that Trump has claimed, he gets the next two also
Why would he not
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how does credible apply to repeating an official

.

Apple was going to create 20,000 new jobs, a new domestic campus and other spending.

I dont think this has happened yet are you not now credible and A Moron for Quoting Apple . No ... why because you were just repeating the Info not creating it ...

Chris Christie said something like Trump's WH is full of grifters, convicted and unconvicted felons who were hustled into jobs they were never suited for, sometimes seemingly without so much as a background check via Google or Wikipedia. 3 weeks ago Jim got mad at me for saying Trump was a grifter.

Full of foxes watching the hen houses
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"how does credible apply to repeating an official "

I don't know what that sentence means.

But when someone was as colossally wrong as Krugman was, it seems to me that he is driven by political ideology rather than economic truth. So I am stunned that anyone would ever believe him. He has no credibility. Clearly he will lie to smear politicians he doesn't like.

"Apple was going to create 20,000 new jobs, a new domestic campus and other spending."

Over 5 years, so no not yet. They also paid $38 billion to the feds in taxes, when they brought $250 billion back to the US.

There is no evidence Apple will renig. There is plenty of evidence that Krugman was full of crapola. GDP growth is robust, interest rates have been raised, meaning they can be cut again if needed to stimulate growth, the last jobs report was fantastic. But a recession is still coming, regardless of who was POTUS, but obviously we will survive. Krugman said the economy would not survive. You think there's ANY CHANCE that's true? That we literally won't exist because of Trump?

.

Christie is a scumbag who should be in prison for what he did with traffic. But now he's credible to you...interesting.

That's what people think who take things people say literally, Like Mexico will pay for the Wall or there was no collusion

So he can't be a scum bag but credible in this instance.

You have been spending a lot of time defending Trump lately.

And just today we learned the Pres. lawyer admitted the Trump campaign colluded w/our enemy and that the campaign paid the Christian University, Liberty Univ. to rig polls.

Sure a scum bag can be right. But if his judgment has validity when he says Trump was terrible, why do you not assume similar validity to his judgment when he says Obama was wrong?

Not defending Trump. Defending the notion of fairness and accuracy, which even Trump deserves IMO.

or that you can keep you doctor, or that the days of 3% GDP growth are over?

certainaly everyone should be judged the same but didn't Christie have a lot more access to Trump than to Obama? I can't recall the complaints by Christie about Obama? I'm guessing they were about policy, not character. Most of my issues w/Trump has been character related.

the left really spun a wrongly worded question into the campaign colluded , pretty fast

rudy should have answered better but how it came out has been twisted
I believe he was answering for Trump, he was not denying anyone in the campaign may or may not have dealt with russians..
that was my take but your mileage varies as it sways left.

“I never said there was no collusion between the campaign or between people in the campaign ... I have not. I said the president of the United States.”

That statement is really not open for interpretation and contradicts any interview with similar questions dating back many months, where he and Trump stated there was never any collusion or coordinated effort by him or his campaign. It's the typical walk back we see as proof starts to come out, just like the walk back about the Stormy payments, he didn't, until it's proven he did.

try quoting or posting the verbal of the whole exchange including question before answer

sound like you and every other trump hater interprets it as if he admits there was collusion. There is a big difference between what Paul said and what Rudy said.
He is only denying that Trump was not colluding, he is not answering for the others one way or the other, get it? it really is quite simple but I'm sure it is all over the biased media licking their chops telling it like they see it.
read it or listen to it again

The probe is supposed to investigate to see if a crime was committed like conspiring.


If he previously had denied others, and this was in front of Senate hearings or FBI, then lock him up with the other liars.

In the end it matters little what you and I think Bruce, when the facts are out and the Mueller probe is wrapped up, maybe we will all know. What worries me about that is that if Barr is approved his comments on editing the report to show what he feels congress and the public can see isn't making me feel the truth will finally be out there for all to see. I watched most of it since I was home sick with a wonderful winter cold and while he reassured everyone Mueller will be allowed to finish, the fact Mueller would not have control over the release was disturbing; especially in light of his memo.

“Mr. Mayor, false reporting is saying that nobody in the campaign had any contacts with Russia,” Cuomo responded. “False reporting is saying that there has been no suggestion of any kind of collusion between the campaign and any Russians.”

Giuliani jumped to correct Cuomo.

“You just misstated my position,” Giuliani said. “I never said there was no collusion between the campaign, or between people in the campaign.”

Cuomo’s face contorted into an expression of disbelief. “Yes, you have,” he shot back.


When he said he never said there was no collusion isn't that the same as admitting there was collusion?

No
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It’s not the same but I don’t think it matters, the obstruction case may have just gotten a lot stronger.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

New reporting today suggests there may be proof Trump told Comey to lie to Congress, if Mueller has that proof that’s the end of Trump and he can go back to doing what he does best because it isn’t governing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Comey?

Maybe you meant Cohen

Anyway
If true
Get the chit show over with already and burn him at the stake

Oh and by the way, the wall isn’t going to be the entire 650 miles never was going to be.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device