Why Is The GOP Senate So Afraid To Call Witnesses??

Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...
So you want the accused to provide evidence they are not guilty? Lol hahaha you do have a low IQ

So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.
What crime has been committed?
Witnesses who say, I presumed", "I assumed" , I heard ______ say"......that is not evidence in a court of law.
If they wanted witnesses they should have used the courts, but, they were in a hurry to a train wreck....and it did wreck for them.
Perhaps, in their next impeachment hoax with this president they will slow down.
Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] In response, some[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.

The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5]

In late November 2019, the obscure Impoundment Control Act made news during the Trump impeachment investigation, as two budget office staffers resigned over their concerns over apparent improprieties regarding the hold of approved Ukraine military funds. Among the concerns was the questionable transfer of decision-making authority to a political appointee.[6][7][8][9]
 
Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...
So you want the accused to provide evidence they are not guilty? Lol hahaha you do have a low IQ

So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.
In America you can’t accuse someone of murder with no evidence,, this is why Americans think democrats are nazis ,, you are accusing a man with no evidence of wrong doing.. your sick
Wow, in America, they investigate crimes & charge only when there is sufficient evidence. Part of that is discovered through the use of warrants.
So you are in search of a crime? Lol is this serious? You impeach a president because you think you have a crime? Haha
The crime has a name besides an abuse of power;
Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] In response, some[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.

The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5]

In late November 2019, the obscure Impoundment Control Act made news during the Trump impeachment investigation, as two budget office staffers resigned over their concerns over apparent improprieties regarding the hold of approved Ukraine military funds. Among the concerns was the questionable transfer of decision-making authority to a political appointee.[6][7][8][9]
 
So you want the accused to provide evidence they are not guilty? Lol hahaha you do have a low IQ

So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.
In America you can’t accuse someone of murder with no evidence,, this is why Americans think democrats are nazis ,, you are accusing a man with no evidence of wrong doing.. your sick
Wow, in America, they investigate crimes & charge only when there is sufficient evidence. Part of that is discovered through the use of warrants.
So you are in search of a crime? Lol is this serious? You impeach a president because you think you have a crime? Haha
The crime has a name besides an abuse of power;
Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] In response, some[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.

The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5]

In late November 2019, the obscure Impoundment Control Act made news during the Trump impeachment investigation, as two budget office staffers resigned over their concerns over apparent improprieties regarding the hold of approved Ukraine military funds. Among the concerns was the questionable transfer of decision-making authority to a political appointee.[6][7][8][9]
Dude GET SOME FUCKING HELP .. lol you are insane!
 
Sure you did, Faun...sure you did! You keep pretending that happened!
Oh? You wanna bet if I can't show I posted a list of Obama initiatives I claim helped improve the economy, I leave the forum forever; but if I can, you leave forever....

Oh, so you're going to post that same silly shit that you CLAIM created jobs and I'm going to laugh at you again?
Thanks for admitting you lied when you claimed I didn't post a list of initiatives and policies.

I never claimed you didn't post a list, Faun...you did...the problem however is that your "list" doesn't prove Obama's economic policies created jobs! It's laughably bad. Feel free to trot it out once again though...I'm sure someone else could use a chuckle!
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
 
So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.
In America you can’t accuse someone of murder with no evidence,, this is why Americans think democrats are nazis ,, you are accusing a man with no evidence of wrong doing.. your sick
Wow, in America, they investigate crimes & charge only when there is sufficient evidence. Part of that is discovered through the use of warrants.
So you are in search of a crime? Lol is this serious? You impeach a president because you think you have a crime? Haha
The crime has a name besides an abuse of power;
Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] In response, some[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.

The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5]

In late November 2019, the obscure Impoundment Control Act made news during the Trump impeachment investigation, as two budget office staffers resigned over their concerns over apparent improprieties regarding the hold of approved Ukraine military funds. Among the concerns was the questionable transfer of decision-making authority to a political appointee.[6][7][8][9]
Dude GET SOME FUCKING HELP .. lol you are insane!
I did. It's called the Impoundment Act of 1974. It was very helpful in determining with 100% accuracy Trumps guilt. They even have the documents proving Trump's guilt. Isn't it wonderful when the truth is exposed for the whole world to see? //www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/trump-ukraine-docs-show-concern-withholding-aide-was-illegal-75545157799

Now let's see what the corrupt senate has to say about it. I guess violation of the Impoundment Act will be used for so more process bs? :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:"Process?" WTF?
 
So, in a murder trial;, you would call no witnesses that show your client is innocent?

So far most witnesses have agreed that Trump quid pro quo.

If the Republicans call no one, their vote is 100% political & pisses on the duty as set forth by the US Constitution.
In America you can’t accuse someone of murder with no evidence,, this is why Americans think democrats are nazis ,, you are accusing a man with no evidence of wrong doing.. your sick
Wow, in America, they investigate crimes & charge only when there is sufficient evidence. Part of that is discovered through the use of warrants.
So you are in search of a crime? Lol is this serious? You impeach a president because you think you have a crime? Haha
The crime has a name besides an abuse of power;
Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] In response, some[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.

The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5]

In late November 2019, the obscure Impoundment Control Act made news during the Trump impeachment investigation, as two budget office staffers resigned over their concerns over apparent improprieties regarding the hold of approved Ukraine military funds. Among the concerns was the questionable transfer of decision-making authority to a political appointee.[6][7][8][9]
Dude GET SOME FUCKING HELP .. lol you are insane!
Oh, and you are minus any arguing points. Sucks to be you.
 
In America you can’t accuse someone of murder with no evidence,, this is why Americans think democrats are nazis ,, you are accusing a man with no evidence of wrong doing.. your sick
Wow, in America, they investigate crimes & charge only when there is sufficient evidence. Part of that is discovered through the use of warrants.
So you are in search of a crime? Lol is this serious? You impeach a president because you think you have a crime? Haha
The crime has a name besides an abuse of power;
Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the President may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within 45 days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request, and has ignored most Presidential requests.[4] In response, some[who?] have called for a line item veto to strengthen the rescission power and force Congress to vote on the disputed funds.

The Act was passed in response to feelings in Congress that President Nixon was abusing his power of impoundment by withholding funding of programs he opposed. The Act, especially after Train v. City of New York (1975), effectively removed the presidential power of impoundment.[5]

In late November 2019, the obscure Impoundment Control Act made news during the Trump impeachment investigation, as two budget office staffers resigned over their concerns over apparent improprieties regarding the hold of approved Ukraine military funds. Among the concerns was the questionable transfer of decision-making authority to a political appointee.[6][7][8][9]
Dude GET SOME FUCKING HELP .. lol you are insane!
I did. It's called the Impoundment Act of 1974. It was very helpful in determining with 100% accuracy Trumps guilt. They even have the documents proving Trump's guilt. Isn't it wonderful when the truth is exposed for the whole world to see? //www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/trump-ukraine-docs-show-concern-withholding-aide-was-illegal-75545157799

Now let's see what the corrupt senate has to say about it. I guess violation of the Impoundment Act will be used for so more process bs? :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:"Process?" WTF?
He was never charged with it because your stupid lol
 
The Senate will not allow the House to dictate how the charges will be brought or who will testify. The had their bite of the apple, now it's the Senate's turn to run things.
 
Oh? You wanna bet if I can't show I posted a list of Obama initiatives I claim helped improve the economy, I leave the forum forever; but if I can, you leave forever....

Oh, so you're going to post that same silly shit that you CLAIM created jobs and I'm going to laugh at you again?
Thanks for admitting you lied when you claimed I didn't post a list of initiatives and policies.

I never claimed you didn't post a list, Faun...you did...the problem however is that your "list" doesn't prove Obama's economic policies created jobs! It's laughably bad. Feel free to trot it out once again though...I'm sure someone else could use a chuckle!
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.
 
Oh, so you're going to post that same silly shit that you CLAIM created jobs and I'm going to laugh at you again?
Thanks for admitting you lied when you claimed I didn't post a list of initiatives and policies.

I never claimed you didn't post a list, Faun...you did...the problem however is that your "list" doesn't prove Obama's economic policies created jobs! It's laughably bad. Feel free to trot it out once again though...I'm sure someone else could use a chuckle!
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
 
Democrats Are Daring Mitch McConnell to Call Impeachment Witnesses

Less than a couple of months ago -- Trump's BFF at Fox & Friends said this....

"If the president said, I'll give you the money, but you've got to investigate Joe Biden, that'd be off the rails wrong" --- and thru the UNDER OATH TESTIMONIES of Trump's own officials, they proved that is exactly what happened....and what did Steve Doocy do?? Pretend that he never said what he said, why?? Because he and most other Trumpers are full of shit.....

View attachment 295699

And in the spirit of being full of shit, Mitch McConnell doesn't want to call any witnesses..even tho Trump wants to have a long drawn out trial with lots of witnesses, even tho Democrats wants to call witnesses who Trump claims will exonerate him -- it is the GOP who is refusing to call any witnesses, why??

"Chuck Schumer on Thursday tore into Mitch McConnell for “breaking precedent” in announcing he will be in lock step with Donald Trump’s legal team throughout an impeachment trial, accusing him of helping the president skirt accountability. “We ask: Is the president’s case so weak that none of the president’s men can defend him under oath?” Schumer said on the Senate floor, after McConnell dismissed the historic vote to impeach Trump as a “partisan crusade.” “If the House case is so weak, why is Leader McConnell so afraid of witnesses and documents?”

For months, all I have seen from you trumpers was "just wait until it gets to the Senate, then Trump can present his case" …"just wait until Trump presents his secret evidence that will totally own the Dems" --

Witnesses were called in the last impeachment trial, why not this one?? Why aren't you demanding that the GOP Senate Leader give Trump what he claims he wants?? Or is this tough talk about witnesses and evidence just shit he tells yall -- even tho both you and he knows all of yall are full of shit...
They don't have any supporting witnesses who can testify in Trump's defense. They don't exist.

Not necessary. No crime has been proved.
 
Thanks for admitting you lied when you claimed I didn't post a list of initiatives and policies.

I never claimed you didn't post a list, Faun...you did...the problem however is that your "list" doesn't prove Obama's economic policies created jobs! It's laughably bad. Feel free to trot it out once again though...I'm sure someone else could use a chuckle!
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:
 
I never claimed you didn't post a list, Faun...you did...the problem however is that your "list" doesn't prove Obama's economic policies created jobs! It's laughably bad. Feel free to trot it out once again though...I'm sure someone else could use a chuckle!
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!
 
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!
Poor lying con tool, Obama was handed a horrible economy and turned it around. Impeached Trump was handed a good economy and kept it growing. I mentioned a bunch of things Obama did. It matters not to anyone the a lying con tool thinks Obama's policies didn't help. Of course, I'm saying this to an idiot who thinks Impeached Trump did help the economy before he was even sworn in, before even his first policy went into effect. :cuckoo:
 
Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!
Poor lying con tool, Obama was handed a horrible economy and turned it around. Impeached Trump was handed a good economy and kept it growing. I mentioned a bunch of things Obama did. It matters not to anyone the a lying con tool thinks Obama's policies didn't help. Of course, I'm saying this to an idiot who thinks Impeached Trump did help the economy before he was even sworn in, before even his first policy went into effect. :cuckoo:

:auiqs.jpg:

Wall Street welcomes Trump with a bang: Dow soars 257 points, nears lifetime high
 
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!
Poor lying con tool, Obama was handed a horrible economy and turned it around. Impeached Trump was handed a good economy and kept it growing. I mentioned a bunch of things Obama did. It matters not to anyone the a lying con tool thinks Obama's policies didn't help. Of course, I'm saying this to an idiot who thinks Impeached Trump did help the economy before he was even sworn in, before even his first policy went into effect. :cuckoo:

:auiqs.jpg:

Wall Street welcomes Trump with a bang: Dow soars 257 points, nears lifetime high
Um, the stock market is not an economic indicator.
 
No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!
Poor lying con tool, Obama was handed a horrible economy and turned it around. Impeached Trump was handed a good economy and kept it growing. I mentioned a bunch of things Obama did. It matters not to anyone the a lying con tool thinks Obama's policies didn't help. Of course, I'm saying this to an idiot who thinks Impeached Trump did help the economy before he was even sworn in, before even his first policy went into effect. :cuckoo:

:auiqs.jpg:

Wall Street welcomes Trump with a bang: Dow soars 257 points, nears lifetime high
Um, the stock market is not an economic indicator.

Ok, what about record low unemployment? Is that an "economic indicator?"

What about record wage growth? Is that an "economic indicator?"

What about record housing sales, is that an "economic indicator?"
 
No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!
Poor lying con tool, Obama was handed a horrible economy and turned it around. Impeached Trump was handed a good economy and kept it growing. I mentioned a bunch of things Obama did. It matters not to anyone the a lying con tool thinks Obama's policies didn't help. Of course, I'm saying this to an idiot who thinks Impeached Trump did help the economy before he was even sworn in, before even his first policy went into effect. :cuckoo:

:auiqs.jpg:

Wall Street welcomes Trump with a bang: Dow soars 257 points, nears lifetime high
Um, the stock market is not an economic indicator.


Um, actually it is.


The big dip in stock prices in October 1929 foretold the Great Depression. Ditto with the dip in stock prices in 08-09 and the resultant Obama Recession, that fortunately, Trump was able to get us out of.
 
Slobbers a lying con tool.
icon_rolleyes.gif

Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!

How about these statistics, we lost 800,000 jobs in jan & Feb of 2009. Our economy was shrinking at a rate over 6%.

The truth is that Obmsa built a string, growing economy.

Trump's plan was to create jobs through borrowing 1.5 trillion.
 
Truth hurts...doesn't it, Faun!
Not at all and no truths are found in your post.

No truth? You know as well as I do that Barry was terrible at job creation. You just refuse to admit it. Instead...you fall back on personal insults repeated ad nauseum and your pathetic use of a graph that doesn't reveal the truth about what took place back then.
His record shows otherwise, lying con tool.

:dance:

Statistics can be used to do one of two things, Faun...to illustrate the truth...or to obscure it! You use statistics to hide how badly Barack Obama's Administration did when it came to creating jobs. It's why you struggle so mightily for a response when I ask for something as simple as what Obama economic policy CREATED jobs!

How about these statistics, we lost 800,000 jobs in jan & Feb of 2009. Our economy was shrinking at a rate over 6%.

The truth is that Obmsa built a string, growing economy.

Trump's plan was to create jobs through borrowing 1.5 trillion.


Obama was President in January and February 2009.

Just the facts, Dave.
 

Forum List

Back
Top