I was not going to post Here Anymore

[albin35]

But this is Funny!

[JohnR]

Comey is the only straight shooter there

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Comey is the only straight shooter there

John, do you still think he is a straight shooter still? especially since more and more comes out about the corruption of this investigation of emails

http://video.foxnews.com/v/514656113...#sp=show-clips

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

John, do you still think he is a straight shooter still? especially since more and more comes out about the corruption of this investigation of emails

http://video.foxnews.com/v/514656113...#sp=show-clips

Name one thing that's corrupt about the investigation.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Name one thing that's corrupt about the investigation.

The immunities handed out like candy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by spence

Name one thing that's corrupt about the investigation.

How is that corrupt?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Slipknot]

It is very clear to me that there is a plot from the top to see to it that Clinton becomes president at all costs to defeat Trump.

Put everything together with open eyes and the answers to questions are right there plain as day. Deny all you want, facts are facts.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

How is that corrupt?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Take your meds
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Name one thing that's corrupt about the investigation.

Hilary's endless list of lies as the investigation developed (I turned over all work emails, I only used one device, I sent none that were flagged as classified at the time, etc).

Near the end of the investigation, Bill Clinton meets with the AG on her jet. Just after this meeting, the Justice Dept announces no charges. Stunning coincidence.

Just after it's announced that no charges will be filed, team Hilary says they would consider keeping Lynch on as AG (I keep mentioning this, you have not responded that I saw. Are you going to tell me there's no appearance of a quid pro quo there? Seriously?)

It's a tad strange to give immunity to so many people, and have zero indictments to show for it in the end.

Nope, nothing to see here, other than the vast right wing conspiracy.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

There's so much wrong with this post. Clinton didn't gut military spending, he held it steady after a decline by Reagan and Bush 41.

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...tary-readiness

The Bush tax cuts mostly just increased the deficit

Bush's average deficit as percentage of GDP compares favorably to Presidents since Reagan. Only Clinton had a lower ratio of deficit to GDP. And Bush's average ratio was significantly raised by TARP. Clinton's was so low because of spending cuts (including military) and the false picture created by the dot.com bubble which burst just before he left office which left Bush with a rapidly rising deficit. Bush's tax cuts, it is argued, helped to stimulate economic growth which had fallen to 1% in 2001 to above 4% in 2003 after which it slowly dropped until 2006 and spiked up again to 3% in 2007. Then the Bank failure contributed to the so-called great recession. And the mortgage bubble had begun well before Bush. In essence, he "inherited" (I know you like the notion of Presidents, at least Obama, inheriting stuff) the collapse of the dot.com bubble and the rise of the mortgage bubble. He contributed to that with the Iraq War, but still managed to grow the economy in the interim until the poop hit the fan--which he warned Congress several times that the crisis was looming but which the likes of Barney Frank dismissed, so nothing was done to correct the problem.

Also, average unemployment rate under Bush was 5.31% which was slightly higher than Clinton's average of 5.17%

while economic growth was driven by a real estate bubble.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The real estate bubble was a part of growth, as was the tech bubble for Clinton. So if you want to take away Bush's bubble, you'd have to take away Clinton's. And, besides, the mortgage bubble started well before Bush and passed through Clinton who also would have advantaged because of it.

But thanks, as you usually do, for slanting away from my response to RIROCKHOUND which was simply a cite to the last time a President lowered taxes and raised military spending. You may want to argue about whose theories on effects are right or wrong, but the simple fact is that economies have survived and even grown when taxes were lowered and military spending rose. Parse it all you want, but it did happen.

[detbuch]

This is the link for the above post replying to Spence re Clinton "gutting the military." I don't know why the link I entered in the above post cannot be accessed. But it can here:

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...tary-readiness

"gutted" might have been too strong a word, or maybe not.