Why does Biden's alleged corruption get a pass?

[Michaels153]

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/steve-hilton-trump-hounded-biden-investigation
Steve Hilton: Why is Trump hounded while Biden's alleged corruption gets a pass? The 'Swamp' knows
By Steve Hilton

We now need to hear from Joe Biden. How much U.S. taxpayer money went to Ukrainian gas company Burisma while your son Hunter was on the board of directors, and you sent billions of dollars to Ukraine's energy industry? You said you didn't know about your son's ties to Burisma, but last year, he said he told you. So who's lying? You or your son?

And yes, let's call him, too. Hunter Biden, please summarize your expertise in energy matters in 2014 when you were hired by Burisma. Please describe your business experience in Ukraine in 2014 when you were hired by Burisma.

Did you hire former John Kerry aide, David Leiter, as Burisma's Washington lobbyist? When you were wandering around a crack den in Los Angeles in late 2016 while on the Burisma board, was that on behalf of Burisma?

Let's call Burisma founder, Mykola Zlochevsky. Why did you hire Hunter Biden? Was it his connections? Which connections? With strippers or crack dealers? As a corrupt oligarch, perhaps you thought Hunter Biden might bring you judicial immunity. Not a bad assumption, considering that when Hunter Biden returned a rental car with a crack pipe inside along with a mysterious white residue. He got off with no charges being filed.

Let's call Burisma board member, Devon Archer. When you met with Vice President Biden, the new head of Ukraine policy at the White House on the evening of April 16, 2014, did you discuss Ukraine energy or Burisma? Or was it just a total coincidence that two days after that meeting, Hunter Biden joined Burisma's board, and that three days after that, the vice president flew to Ukraine with promises of billions in aid for the Ukraine energy sector, which his son was now being paid by?

Let's call David Leiter, the former John Kerry aide hired by Burisma soon after Hunter Biden and Devon Archer, also a former Kerry aide who joined the Burisma board. Were you paid $90,000.00 by Burisma? What was that contract for? And was it a foreign influence campaign to direct U.S. taxpayer dollars to Burisma? Why did you donate thousands of dollars to Democratic Sens. Ed Markey, Jeanne Shaheen and Richard Blumenthal in the year leading up to your Burisma registration?

Let's get the senators to testify. Senator Markey, Senator Shaheen -- was it a coincidence that shortly after Ukraine energy sector lobbyist, David Leiter, gave you thousands of dollars in donations, you wrote to President Obama urging him to send more aid to the Ukraine energy sector?

Were you aware of the original source of the Leiter donations? Were you aware they came from a lobbyist for a corrupt foreign company, a company you went on to support? And Sen. Blumenthal, was your decision to sponsor legislation alongside Sen. Markey that pushed more money towards Ukraine's gas sector influenced by Ukraine gas lobbyist David Leiter's donations to your campaign committee? Let's call John Kerry. As you pushed for taxpayer cash to support the Ukrainian gas industry, your former chief of staff lobbied for a Ukrainian gas company, and your stepson's friend and business partner joined its board. Is that not a blatant and corrupt conflict of interest?

Why did you not recuse yourself from anything to do with Ukraine energy? Are you aware that David Leiter used his connection to you to get foreign clients for his lobbying firm while you were secretary of state? Can you explain why that is not totally corrupt?

Talking of corruption, let's call the whistleblower who started this all. How many times have you met Joe Biden? Would you describe yourself as nonpartisan? Why did you hire a lawyer who said right after President Trump's inauguration that a coup had started against him? Please describe all contact you've had with Rep. Adam Schiff and anyone on his staff.

Let's call DNC operative Alexandra Chalupa. You were paid over $400,000 by the DNC. between 2004 and 2016. Please describe the work you carried out for them? Did you seek information about Donald Trump from Ukraine, as asserted by the Ukrainian government?

And let's end, for now, with this one: If it's wrong for Republicans to solicit foreign dirt on Democrats, why is it okay for Democrats to solicit foreign dirt on Republicans? Yes, there are a lot of questions. And the biggest one of all -- the one we started with -- why does every allegation against Donald Trump get endlessly investigated while Joe Biden's corruption, John Kerry's corruption, Ed Markey's corruption, Jeanne Shaheen's corruption, Richard Blumenthal's corruption -- all of that outrageous and obvious Democratic corruption in the Ukraine cash for gas scandal -- is completely ignored?

You know why. Because the Swamp looks after its own.

[leftyg]

Michaels, it gets a pass because it is a red herring. https://www.google.com/search?q=red+her ... e&ie=UTF-8
Biden was sent as an emissary to the Ukraine to deliver a message that if Victor Shokin was not immediately fired as a prosecutor, Ukraine would not get a billion dollars in funding from the United States, the EU and the IMF.

Shokin was fired for that reason and there are a lot of people in high places in government in several countries that know this. The right would look like fools if they pursued this allegation. They would be smart not to even try because they would only look foolish. But I hope they do try because I think they will be eating crow if they do..

[Michaels153]

You have been wrong before.

[leftyg]

You have been wrong before.

If that ain't the kettle telling the pot it is black Look, I have documented this many times on other threads. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 785620002/ And there are a mess more https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CH ... DkQ4dUDCAs

The point is Michaels there is no evidence that Biden did anything wrong. Knowledgeable people say that the whole Ukraine business is a Kremlin implant into the impressionable mind of Donald Trump https://www.google.com/search?q=Trump+u ... e&ie=UTF-8

This is only going to embarrass the GOP. I mean I would love them to investigate Biden because I think it would blow up in their faces. But I do not think the party leadership is that stupid. They know that it is just a red herring, and they know that Trump wanted to get Ukraine to invesitage the Bidens or at least announce it. The GOP knows it, but they do not want it to blow up in their faces as it likely will if they do anything with it.

[Michaels153]

Pam Bondi made her presentation in the trial leading up to to acquittal of President Trump
Steve Hilton follows up with an even more in depth presentation of the Ukraine cash for gas scandal as he called it.
Then comes commentary by Rush Limbaugh who added
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/02/03/the-today-show-grills-biden-on-hunter/
The Today Show Grills Biden on Hunter
Feb 3, 2020

USH: Grab audio sound bite number 7. This is funny. This is Savannah Guthrie this morning on the Today Show, and she is chatting with Bite Me, Plugs, and she brings up… This is fascinating to me the way this happens. Up until today in the Drive-By Media, if you brought up — Burisma — if you brought up Hunter Biden, if you brought up Ukraine, it was a laser attack on Trump, and they would make no bones about it.

But if the press asks about Biden and Burisma and about his son Hunter, well that's freedom of the Press. That's somebody or some organization trying to take down the leading opposition candidate for the upcoming election. Or is it?

...But now that the acquittal is on the verge of happening, now everything’s changed. Now she’s asking Plugs about his son Hunter and Burisma. The question is on the bite. Here we go…

GUTHRIE: Do you agree that it sets a bad image?

BIDEN: Yeah, and my son said that!

GUTHRIE: Do you think it was wrong for him to take that position —

BIDEN: No.

GUTHRIE: — knowing that it was really because that company wanted access to you?

BIDEN: That’s not true. You’re saying things you do not know what you’re talking about. No one said that. Who said that?

Well Joe, for starters, your own son said it in the interview shown by Pam Bondi.
the questions continue:

UTHRIE: Well —

BIDEN: Who said that?

GUTHRIE: Don’t you think that it’s just one of those things where people think, “Well, that seems kind of sleazy. Why would he have that job if not for who his father was?”
BIDEN: ‘Cause he’s a very bright guy.

GUTHRIE: I guess the question I’m kind of asking is —

BIDEN: Appearance.

GUTHRIE: — was it right?

BIDEN: Was appearance.

GUTHRIE: Yeah.

BIDEN: Yeah. Well, he said he regretted having done it. He can speak for himself. He’s a grown man.

Yes he is a grown man, and he is a bright guy, and the grown man who is a bright guy said he probably would not have gotten the job if it were not for his father.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kyle-drennen/2020/02/03/wow-nbcs-guthrie-grills-biden-sons-sleazy-ukraine-dealings
WOW: NBC’s Guthrie Grills Biden on Son’s ‘Sleazy’ Ukraine Dealings
By Kyle Drennen

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020/02/03/biden-fires-back-at-nbcs-guthrie-for-hunter-questions-you-do-not-know-what-youre-talking-about/
unfortunately we may have to wait until July when Mr. Durham's report is expected.

[Michaels153]

Remember when the Democrats lied in the trial that acquitted President Trump from the Democrat's lies? One of the lies was that President Trump's phone call to the Ukraine president was only to hurt Joe Biden who was his main opposition for the upcoming election. The results of the Iowa caucus is out and Joe Biden came in fourth place. So I guess that Joe Biden was not the main opposition that President Trump is going to face in the election. I guess President Trump has nothing to fear from Joe Biden and the upcoming election. What is that you say? You say Iowa is only the first primary caucus? YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THAT WHEN YOU WROTE THE ARTICLE FOR IMPEACHMENT, BEFORE THE FIRST PRIMARY CAUCUS! Joe Biden may not be the democrats presidential nominee to face President
Trump. You don't know who is going to be the nominee, And yet you stated that President Trump's phone call to the president of Ukraine was only to investigate Joe Biden because Joe Biden was President Trump's main opposition to the upcoming election. LIE! Nothing but one lie after another from the Democrat Party.

[Michaels153]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/treasury-complies-with-gop-senate-inquiry-hands-over-highly-confidential-info-on-hunter-biden-report-says
Treasury complies with GOP Senate inquiry, hands over highly confidential info on Hunter Biden, report says
By Edmund DeMarche

The Treasury Department complied with a Republican-controlled Senate inquiry into Hunter Biden's business dealings in Ukraine and handed over highly sensitive financial records and "evidence' of questionable origin," a report on Thursday said.
....Yahoo News first reported that the Treasury Department began to turn over the documents related to the Senate inquiry late last year.

Sens. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Ron. Johnson, R-Wisc., the chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, requested the records in the form of a suspicious activity report, also known as a SARs. They also requested financial records through FinCEN, which is a branch of the Treasury Department that eyes money laundering. ....Grassely and Johnson announced in a letter Wednesday they are also seeking “records of Hunter Biden’s travel while he was under U.S. Secret Service protection as they continue to investigate potential conflicts of interest to boost his business ventures in Ukraine and China." "We write to request information about whether Hunter Biden used government-sponsored travel to help conduct private business, to include his work for Rosemont Seneca and related entities in China and Ukraine," the senators wrote, referring to the company co-founded by the younger Biden.

[leftyg]

Treasury complies with GOP Senate inquiry, hands over highly confidential info on Hunter Biden, report says
By Edmund DeMarche

Notice Manuchin complied to the Republican's request. Why didn't the Treasury Department comply for a request for Trump's tax records? https://thehill.com/policy/finance/4423 ... ax-returns Those would be far more valuable than anything they could find on Hunter Biden

It is all part of an effort by the Presidnet through his cngressional associates to politicize the workings of government.

[leftyg]

Remember when the Democrats lied in the trial that acquitted President Trump from the Democrat's lies? One of the lies was that President Trump's phone call to the Ukraine president was only to hurt Joe Biden who was his main opposition for the upcoming election. The results of the Iowa caucus is out and Joe Biden came in fourth place. So I guess that Joe Biden was not the main opposition that President Trump is going to face in the election. I guess President Trump has nothing to fear from Joe Biden and the upcoming election. What is that you say? You say Iowa is only the first primary caucus? YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THAT WHEN YOU WROTE THE ARTICLE FOR IMPEACHMENT, BEFORE THE FIRST PRIMARY CAUCUS! Joe Biden may not be the democrats presidential nominee to face President
Trump. You don't know who is going to be the nominee, And yet you stated that President Trump's phone call to the president of Ukraine was only to investigate Joe Biden because Joe Biden was President Trump's main opposition to the upcoming election. LIE! Nothing but one lie after another from the Democrat Party.

That was not a lie Michaels. Biden was first in the polls in July, when the call was made in July. Trump admitted that he wanted an investigation into the Bidens on this video Watch it it is only 1:04 long: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Tr ... C4C89BD315

Trump got off because his party refused to look at his own taped confession. He, Trump is a liar and a coward. Evidently so is the senate that let him off. He will always be impeached.

[Michaels153]

According to taxnotes.com , Presidents are not required by law to release their tax returns.

Individual tax returns - including those of public figures - are private information, protected by law, from unauthorized disclosure. Indeed, the Internal Revenue Service is barred from releasing any taxpayer information whatsoever except to authorized agencies and individuals....Like all other citizens, U.S. Presidents enjoy this protection of their privacy.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/442364-mnuchin-formally-rejects-dem-request-for-trumps-tax-returns
Mnuchin formally rejects Dem request for Trump's tax returns

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin on Monday formally rejected Democrats’ request for President Trump’s tax returns, setting up a likely court battle.
“I am informing you now that the Department may not lawfully fulfill the Committee’s request,” Mnuchin said in a one-page letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-Mass.), adding that the request “lacks a legitimate legislative purpose.” Mnuchin said he made the decision while relying on the advice of the Department of Justice (DOJ). He said DOJ plans to publish its legal opinion as soon as possible.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/481993-appeals-court-rules-democrats-cant-sue-trump-over-emoluments-claims

A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., threw out a lawsuit accusing President Trump of illegally profiting off his private businesses while in office, ruling that the Democratic lawmakers who brought the suit lack legal standing.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/individual-members-of-congress-barred-from-suing-president-trump-over-business-dealings/2020/02/07/b3d97b3c-3c7e-11ea-baca-eb7ace0a3455_story.html

Individual members of Congress cannot sue President Trump to stop his private businesses from accepting payments from foreign governments, a federal appeals court in Washington ruled Friday.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit unanimously dismissed a lawsuit filed by more than 200 Democrats in Congress seeking to enforce the Constitution’s anti-corruption emoluments provision....“Individual members of Congress simply cannot do their job,” he said, if there is no legal right or standing to sue..

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/federal-appeals-court-dismisses-trump-emoluments-case-n1132441
Democrats lack legal standing to sue Trump over alleged emoluments violations, appeals court rules

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/07/trump-wins-appeal-of-emoluments-clause-lawsuit-by-democrats.html
Trump wins appeal in case where Democrats sued him for allegedly violating emoluments clause

“The Constitution permits the Judiciary to speak only in the context of an Article III case or controversy and this lawsuit presents neither.”

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley wrote that there was a big difference between legitimate congressional oversight and what the Democrats were doing.

[color=#FF0000] The Democrats have no legal right, to request President Trump's taxes. President Trump has changed his mind and is now not willing to turn them over to the Democrats.
That is the President's right. The liars will claim that this president has something to hide. The President has nothing to gain by complying to this Democrats demand. Google has said that President Trump is the first major party nominee since 1977 to not make his tax returns public. The recent appeals court decision pointed out that the Democrats do not have standing in the Emoluments case either. When the Democrats cite their congressional oversight duties and argue that it is within their right to compel compliance to their requests for that purpose, they ignore that they are not above the law and that they must carry out their duties within the law. They have no legal standing to compel the President to turn over their taxes. The President knows this, and has taken the long route through the courts to show this to the Democrats. The Democrats, having failed (again) to get what they want directly (the President's taxes), then sought to secure his taxes by filing the emoluments suits. And, the President can if he wanted to, end any and all attempts of the Democrats to release his taxes by executive order.

[leftyg]

Every other president has released them, even Nixon. What does Trump have to hide? I do not care about the legal arguments. I just want to know what he has to hide. Every other president did it.

[Michaels153]

Every other president has released them, even Nixon. What does Trump have to hide? I do not care about the legal arguments. I just want to know what he has to hide. Every other president did it.

Not every president has released them. Your lame "What does Trump have to hide" is repeated by you and all the anti-Trump crowd about everything. And now after all your schemes and plots to ruin this man you aim to keep trying to do the same. You dont care about the rule of law. You dont care that President Trump is good for our country. And i dont care what you or any of your ilk want anymore.
The best thing that could happen to our country is for the people to vote for conservative republicans to replace the Democrats in Congress. Until that happens, i am looking forward to Durham's report and the prosecutions that will follow.

[leftyg]

Not every president has released them. Your lame "What does Trump have to hide" is repeated by you and all the anti-Trump crowd about everything. And now after all your schemes and plots to ruin this man you aim to keep trying to do the same. You dont care about the rule of law. You dont care that President Trump is good for our country. And i dont care what you or any of your ilk want anymore.
The best thing that could happen to our country is for the people to vote for conservative republicans to replace the Democrats in Congress. Until that happens, i am looking forward to Durham's report and the prosecutions that will follow.

Michaels, all recent presidents have released their taxes. Even Dick Nixon said "the people have to know that their president is not a crook." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh163n1lJ4M So you really do not have a point. He is like a mob boss hiding something. But in this case you are rooting for the obviously crooked mob boss. So cheer on the gangster while we back the good guys. So who doesn't care about the rule of law? It looks like YOU don't!

President Trump is about as good for our country as Adolf Hitler was for Germany and Benito Mussolini was for Italy. He divides people and plays favorites.. He is a coward and a bully. He goes to Nuremburg type rallies and does not even pretend to be president to half the country.

And most of the economic advances were made under Obama; Trump has merely kept it going. The best thing to do would be to sweep the GOP out of office completely.

[Michaels153]

[/quote]Michaels, all recent presidents have released their taxes. That was their choice, and you are pro choice are you not? Even Dick Dick?, not a spelling error and you consider spelling errors to be ad hominem but President Nixon is usually referred to as Richard Nixon to avoid the vulgar slang referrence. Your choice of referring to President Nixon, as Dick, is purposeful. Dick Van Dyke was not referred to as Richard either, so save your insincere attempts to provide yourself with a politically correct excuse for your disregard of social courtesiesNixon said "the people have to know that their president is not a crook." And we all wish that President Clinton and President Obama followed that advice.So you really do not have a point. Unless you consider the rule of law being pointlessHe is like a mob boss hiding something.
Wrong, he is nothing like President Obama.But in this case you are rooting for the obviously crooked mob boss. No, I support President Trump. I am not rooting for former President Obama who may be exposed for some more of his scandals in July when Mr. Durhams' report comes out. So cheer on President Trump. Not that I needed your permission, but thank you anyway. I will "cheer on" President Trump! while we back the bad guys. So who doesn't care about the rule of law? It looks like YOU don't! I quoted the law that says that there is no law that President has to show his taxes and you replied:

I do not care about the legal arguments.

. So who cares about the rule of law? It looks like YOU don't!

President Trump is good for our country. He has exposed the people in your party who are more concerned and dedicated to obtaining and maintaining power than concerned for the actual needs of our country. And when he is not exposing your true agenda and your hypocrisy, your own people unabashedly admit it to your own base. He is a coward and a bully. President Trump is no coward. He has withstood your slings and arrows on a daily basis and he is not throwing in the towel. And when he exposes the lies of your party, wherever they are found, you weep and wail and say he is a bully. Snowflakes all of you. You can dish it out, but you can't take it. Go buy some more Kleenex and toilet paper. Take it somewhere else.
Isaiah 5:20 " Woe to those who call evil good and good evil." You and your party call everything you do as good, and anything that President Trump does as bad. The Lord God has blessed this country. You want to make historical comparisons with Germany, but there is a better comparison when you look at how Jesus Christ was persecuted and what he said to his followers on what they could expect based on the treatment that he received.

And most of the economic advances were made under Obama; I would like to see you try to prove that. I would like to see you break down all the economic advances and then identify those that you say are strictly due to Obama, and those that are attributed to President Trump. You see that already has been done, and economists do not share your assessment of our economic advances. But maybe they are wrong. Maybe they have not considered what you have to offer. So go ahead and shows us why you believe as you do about this.Trump has merely kept it going. The best thing to do would be to sweep the GOP out of office completely. And how would that benefit the country. With the Democrats in complete control of everything, there would be unlimited taxation and the country would go bankrupt, and default from all of the financial obligations that you would placed on it. Every city in the United States would become a sanctuary city. And crime would begin to increase. That is not "the best thing to do."[/quote]

[leftyg]

Here is a graph of growth from about 2001 to the present. What you see is a return to normal after the subprime meltdown that continues until this day:

download (1).png (7.25 KiB) Viewed 114 times

Add to that the fact that over 1.5 million more jobs were created under Obama than under Bush according to Chuck Jones at Forbes when he writes

Trump Has Created 1.5 Million Fewer Jobs Than Obama

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones ... 96b5ba27ce

OR you could simply go to the Bureau of Labor Statistics to find that fact out https://www.thebalance.com/unemployment ... ar-3305506

Further, Trump created a one trillion dollar deficit last year, the first time in full employment anything like that has happened https://www.thebalance.com/us-deficit-by-year-3306306 Compare Obama
s declining deficits with Trump's expanding deficit

[Michaels153]

Your absolutely right Leftyg, the interest in investigating the Biden is increasing. Six million four hundred thousand more people employed since President Trump was legitimately elected according to the will of the American People. On Sunday, Lindsey Graham said that Attorney General William Barr has set up a mechanism to receive purportedly damaging information coming from Ukraine. The stock market has climbed to 29, 276.34 under the legitimately elected President Trump according to the will of the American People. The stock market improved under President Trump by 10,944.34 in less than four years. Under President Obama, the stock market increased 8,707.in eight years. Thanks for reminding us Leftyg that Attorney General William Barr explained that the Justice Department would evaluate the material gathered from Ukraine. In January, the U.S. created 225,000 jobs and if the number of jobs created in the U.S. averages only 187,500, from now to November, then President Trump will have created more jobs in 4 years than President Obama will have created in eight years. Just a couple of days ago Rudy Giuliani claimed that he found the "smoking gun" on Hunter Biden. Oh yes, that is good news Leftyg.

[leftyg]

The market grew by a larger percentage under Obama. Plus, he, Obama, inherited a disaster; Trump inherited a fully recovered econmy. One writer at quora states this:

Since your question was about Obama rather than simply specifying a year, I have assumed your question was more about politics than economics.

When Obama left office, Jan 20, 2017, the Dow closed at 19,827. When he entered office, Jan 20, 2009, the Dow closed at 7,949. In other words, in his 8 years in office the Dow went up roughly 150%. If Trump stays in office 8 years, the Dow would have to be 49,369 for his term in office to equal Obama’s as it relates to the stock market and the Dow Jones Industrial average.

Furthermore, private sector job growth was up 2.2 million in 2016, Obama’s last year in office while job growth in 2017, Trump’s first year, was up 2.1 million. First quarter 2018, job growth was 605,000. Job growth in the first quarter of 2016 was 606,000. Again, job growth under Obama was marginally better than under Trump.

https://www.quora.com/What-was-the-Dow- ... eft-office

The thing is Obama never bragged about what happened, and Trump lies and says he inherited an economy in shambles which simply is not true. Trump has merely added on to what Obama did, but he lacks the humility to ble honest. Instead he crows like a rooster when the sun comes up as if his actions made it rise

But again, you really gave a thoughtful response. Keep it up.

[Michaels153]

Your opinion of Obama does not have to change if you do not want to change it. But at some point you have to accept the bottom line facts at the center of every disagreement with one another. Everyone can find their own reasons to admire or criticize the actions of these presidents and sometimes it is interesting to speculate on the what if's by the actions not taken and why such as NAFTA, the Paris Accords, Iran, etc. People have said that Clinton wished that he had a war during his administration from which he could have acted upon and have it recorded as part of his legacy. You talk about how bad things were when Obama took office but the actions that he did once he took office have been questioned on historical grounds for the results. Maybe if Obama had done what President Trump has done, the results would have been similar or better to what President Trump has accomplished. But the bottom line is that if President Trump surpasses President Obama in four years or less, then why President Obama could not have done the same or better in eight years is a fair question.
I have said this before, but I can understand looking at the conditions that were present when Obama took the office as being a formidable task to overcome. But I don't think people look at the renegotiation of NAFTA, and trade with China and the re-positioning of our financial and military resources in the world, with the same objectivity.

[leftyg]

Michaels, you do not offer an argument. The facts on Obama are clear: he inherited an economy in shambles and he made it much better. The bottom line facts are with my argument. And you are right you find reasons to admire Trumps actions and criticize those of Obama. You just have to acknowledge your bias. No one who is serious could believe that Obama has been "challenged" on "historical grounds." What did he do that was questionable? You do not identify what he allegedly had done. And Obama's presidency is much stronger than Trumps. based on evidence https://www.bbc.com/news/world-45827430 And there is no evidence, and you certainly have not shown it that Trum'ps economy is better. According to Joe Scarorough, six of the last ten presidents had better economies than Trump https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video ... trump.html

Where you get this stuff you spout MIchaels, I cannot fathom, and that you actually think you have demonstrated a point is stunning

[Michaels153]

Michaels, you do not offer an argument. There is nothing to argue here. The facts are what they are. The facts on Obama are clear: he inherited an economy in shambles and he made it much better. The bottom line facts are with my argument. And you are right you find reasons to admire Trumps actions and criticize those of Obama. You just have to acknowledge your bias. I have a bias for the honest interpretation of facts. No one who is serious could believe that Obama has been "challenged" on "historical grounds." WRONG!
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/01/12/the-worst-economic-recovery-since-the-great-depression/#56c34cd71423
[size=150] President Trump inherited the worst economic recovery since the great depression.
What did he do that was questionable? that record shows is that President Obama, with his throwback, old-fashioned, 1970s Keynesian economics, has put America through the worst recovery from a recession since the Great Depression. You do not identify what he allegedly had done. His first act was to increase federal borrowing, the national debt and the deficit by nearly a trillion dollars to finance a supposed “stimulus” package, based on the discredited Keynesian theory left for dead 30 years ago.,... s should have been long expected, Obama’s trillion dollar Keynesian stimulus did nothing to promote recovery and growth, and almost surely delayed it. ...
Instead of a recovery, America has suffered the longest period of unemployment near 9% or above since the Great Depression, under President Obama’s public policy malpractice. ....Under President Obama, America has suffered the longest period with so many in such long-term unemployment since the Great Depression.
...Notably, blacks have been suffering another depression under Obama, with unemployment today, 49 months after the recession started, still at 15.8%. Black unemployment has been over 15% for 2 ½ years under Obama. Black teenage unemployment today is over 40%, where it has persisted for over 2 years as well.Hispanics have also been suffering a depression under Obama, with unemployment today still in double digits at 11%. Hispanic unemployment has been in double digits for three years under President Obama. Over one fourth of Hispanic youths remain unemployed today, which also has persisted for years.

The Census Bureau reported in September that more Americans are in poverty today than at any time in the entire history of Census tracking poverty. Americans dependent on food stamps are at an all time high as well....
Real wages and incomes have been falling so steadily under Obama and his confused, throwback, Keynesian/neo-Marxist Obamanomics, that the Census Bureau also reported that real median family income in America has fallen all the way back to 1996 levels....Obama apologists cannot argue that this is because the recession was so bad, because the historical record in America is the worse the recession the stronger the recovery. Based on historical precedent, we should at worst be finishing the second year of a booming recovery by now....
Compare Obama’s lack of a recovery 2 ½ years after the recession ended with the first 2 ½ years of the Reagan recovery. In those years under Reagan, the American economy created 8 million new jobs, the unemployment rate fell by 3.6 percentage points, real wages and incomes were jumping, and poverty had reversed an upsurge started under Carter, beginning a long term decline.

While Obama crows about 200,000 jobs created last month, the most for a month during his entire Administration, in September, 1983 the Reagan recovery less than a year after it began created 1.1 million jobs in that one month alone. Under Obama, we are still almost 6 million jobs below the peak before the recession started over 4 years ago! In the second year of the Reagan recovery, real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years.
The chief excuse of the Obama apologists is that what we have suffered was not just a recession, but a financial crisis, and, they argue, recovery from a financial crisis takes a lot longer than recovery from a recession. But that is not the experience of the American, free market, capitalist economy.

The experience of the American economy is reported in full at the National Bureau of Economic Research, as cited above – recessions since the Great Depression previously have lasted an average of 10 months, with the longest previously 16 months, and the deeper the recession the stronger the recovery. That is the standard by which the performance of Obamanomics is to be judged. Which of those American recessions was a “financial crisis” that breaks the pattern?...
Indeed, exactly none of President Obama’s policies have been well designed to restore economic recovery and traditional American prosperity. They have consistently been the opposite of everything that Reagan did to end the American decline of the 1970s, and restore booming growth for 25 years. That is why Rush Limbaugh is saying Obama deliberately wants to trash the economy, thinking the resulting dependency will lead a majority to continue to vote for the liberal political machine. And Obama's presidency is much stronger than Trumps. based on evidence https://www.bbc.com/news/world-45827430 And there is no evidence, and you certainly have not shown it that Trum'ps economy is better.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/trump-has-reversed-every-single-failed-economic-policy-of-the-obama-era-heres-what-must-happen-next
Trump has reversed every single failed economic policy of the Obama era –

AND ->https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/a-comparison-of-two-presidents-president-trump-versus-president-obama-their-first-600-days/

As we approach the first 600 days into the Donald J. Trump Presidency it’s again time to assess his accomplishments. What better way to perform this analysis than to compare his results to the prior Administration’s – President Barack H. Obama’s?
On Friday former President Barack Obama gave a speech in Illinois where he was critical of the current President while never referring to President Trump as “President”. Obama then took credit for President Trump’s economy. http://www.theamericanmirror.com/hes-ba ... te-speech/ HE’S BACK! Obama refers to himself 102 times during 64-minute speech
SEPTEMBER 7, 2018
BY VICTOR SKINNER

Sean Hannity on FOX News shared parts of Obama’s speech and compared it to events from the Obama era –As we approach President Trump’s first 600 days in office, we decided to compare his economic results to those of Obama for the exact same time period. We start with the stock market results.

The DOW
After President Obama was elected President the already low stock market crashed. When Trump was elected the stock market skyrocketed. The markets are a gauge of the economy and include expectations of the future.

The day President Obama was elected President, November 4th, 2008, the DOW stood at 9,625. Immediately however, the DOW began to tank and by March 9, 2009, the DOW could go down no further as it landed at 6,547 for a decrease of more than 30%.

After President Trump was elected the DOW exploded. On November 8th, 2016, the DOW stood at 18,332. Since that date the DOW has soared and it never looked back.

Not only has the DOW skyrocketed since Donald Trump was elected President, the market’s rise is record breaking. Since the 2016 election, the DOW has closed at new record all-time highs 99 times! (President Obama never saw a new all-time high in the DOW his entire first term and only saw 105 all-time closing highs from his first election win until Trump’s.)

President Trump’s first year in office (2017) saw the most all-time stock market closing highs (71) as well as the largest increase in DOW history (4,956 points). Prior to 2017, no year in the DOW’s more than 100-year history ever saw the DOW increase by more than 3,500 points, let alone 4,900. The most all-time highs in a year prior to 2017 was 69 in 1995.Since President Trump was elected President the DOW tied the record for the most all-time closing highs in a row. In January of 1987 President Reagan saw the DOW increase to new all-time highs a record 12 days in a row. In February of 2017, President Trump matched Reagan’s record.

The DOW reached its fastest 500 point increase between major milestones under President Trump. In January of this year the DOW surpassed 26,000 and six days later the DOW surpassed 26,500. Under President Trump the DOW has seen the fastest 1,000; 2,000; 3,000; 4,000; 5,000; 6,000 and 7,000 point increases in DOW history. No similar records occurred during the Obama years.[/b]

Also, President Trump didn’t ride an Obama wave, the DOW under Obama went down in 2015 and stayed relatively flat until the 2016 election.

Russell 2000

The Russell 2000 is a major index of US small cap stocks recognized throughout the financial industry. The 2000 companies in the Russell 2000 are the bottom 2000 companies in the Russell 3000. These companies have seen incredible results as well since President Trump was elected President. The Russell 2000 reached 31 new highs in 2017 and this year already has reached 30 new all-time highs.

The Russell 2000 never reached a new high in Obama’s first 600 days and only reached 3 new all-time highs in his entire first term! The other major indices are all the same, recording massive gains since President Trump was elected into office with dismal results in Obama’s first 600 days in office.

GDP and Debt

According Rex Sinquefield at Forbes in October of 2016 –

The Obama recovery of the last seven years remains the worst in postwar American history. Average gross domestic product (GDP) growth since the bottom of the recession in 2009 was barely above 2.1% per year. The average since 1949 is well above 4% per year during the previous 10 expansions.

This result is not just bad, it is catastrophic. The average American should not be wondering if his or her income is a bit above or below 2007 levels. Just by historical averages, the average American should be 20% better off than in 2007. And this slow growth is settling in as a permanent new-abnormal.

I believe the root cause of abysmal growth is the huge tax increases imposed by Obama and the Democrats in Congress since 2008. The most harmful were the increase in the capital gains tax from 15 to 20 percent, the increase in top bracket income from 35 to 39.6 percent, and the new tax of 3.8 percent on investment income in the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The massive increase in regulatory burden through the ACA and Dodd-Frank bills are also crushing, but unfortunately are harder to measure.

President Trump however last quarter reached a GDP of 4.2%.

In regards to debt, President Obama increased the amount of US debt astronomically. By the time Obama left office he had doubled the US debt to $20 trillion and incurred as much debt as all previous Presidents combined. President Trump is slowing that trend.

In his first 600 days President Obama increased the amount of US debt by $2.8 trillion. In his first 600 days, in spite of increasing interest rates and the massive debt that he inherited, President Trump’s debt increase is around half that of Obama’s ($1.5 trillion).

As a result, the debt to GDP ratio is going down. President Obama increased the US debt to GDP ratio by 40% from around 60% in 2009 to over 100% in 2016.

With his increasing GDP and slowing of debt increases, President Trump has managed to decrease the debt to GDP ratio in his first 600 days in office. This is a very good result that is rarely mentioned by the MSM.

Jobs

Charles Payne from FOX Business reported on some stunning manufacturing news. Via Making Money with Charles Payne:

Speaking of jobs, I looked at the ADP report yesterday, Tammy, 830,000 new manufacturing jobs in the last 19 months. The prior 19 months, 26,000.

Trump bested Obama by 804,000 manufacturing jobs since taking over White House when compared to the 19 months prior to the 2016 election! These high paying jobs are the same jobs that Obama said would never come back.

In President Obama’s first 600 days in office, the US lost over (4.4) million jobs. In President Trump’s first 600 days in office, the US has gained over 3.4 million jobs.

In summary, in every major economic category, President Trump’s economy is moving in the right direction and is mostly record breaking. In comparison, President Obama’s economy his first 600 days were some of the worst months in US economic history. President Trump has reversed the Obama economic nightmare.