Did you bring enough Kool-Aid for the whole class?
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
You mean like my grandmother? Who is retired and not actively seeking work?
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,272
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
You mean like my grandmother? Who is retired and not actively seeking work?
According to Unsung, my 1 and a half year old nephew should be counted.
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
You mean like my grandmother? Who is retired and not actively seeking work?
Yes But is your grandmother a leftist? Or a globalist? Or a statist? Or all 3?
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
But you know the current, "official" unemployment rate is fake? Makes sense.
It's a felony isn't it to not disclose requested information on a federal, official form? I wonder if the Donald directed him to omit the information? Could come out in depositions or under questioning by the committee or in an official request for answers to typewritten questions. Wouldn't want to inconvenience the dear boy with trudging up the hill to testify and keep him from his really important work, now would we fellas?
Oh dear, dear, dear me ol' Jarrod ol' boy with the deepest of my apologies, I regret to inform you ol' boy why in fact, if it was Form 86 you were hereby requested to complete, that it is indeed a felony to knowingly omit or falsify requested information. Oh dear, indeed. See? It says so right there on that silly page two, plain as a 600 yard drive on the shart hole.
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
The unemployment rate has been measured the same way for a very long time.
How the hell should I know. But if you go back and figure the numbers the way it was during the Depression you'd see the difference. Now those out of the job market for an amount of time are not considered in the equation even though they are unemployed.
The unemployment rate has been measured the same way for a very long time.
No, you have to go back to the Great Depression to get the true unemployment measurement method. Liberal bullshit like child labour laws and retirement have skewed the figures beyond recognition.
You have to look at the entire population vs the number of people who are employed, that's the true measure. It's called the Hannity method. You have to do it that way so that you can include students, retirees, stay at home spouses, and people like my mother who takes care of her elderly mother full time. Doesn't matter if she isn't looking for work, she is unemployed so Obama needs to take the blame.
What has President Trump done that is impeachable? Disagreeing or hating a presedent is not grounds for impeachment. If that was the case, we would have had many impeached presidents by now. If all you needed to do was hate, or disagree with the guy to make them go away. President George W would've had a really short term, Obama wouldn't have lasted a month. Come on. If President Trump does something impeachable I would support the impeachment, then eat a lot of crow. Maby it will happen, but that hasn't happened. Impending Impeachment??? There's nothing pending.
What has President Trump done that is impeachable? Disagreeing or hating a presedent is not grounds for impeachment. If that was the case, we would have had many impeached presidents by now. If all you needed to do was hate, or disagree with the guy to make them go away. President George W would've had a really short term, Obama wouldn't have lasted a month. Come on. If President Trump does something impeachable I would support the impeachment, then eat a lot of crow. Maby it will happen, but that hasn't happened. Impending Impeachment??? There's nothing pending.
Look up emolument clause.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,272
What has President Trump done that is impeachable? Disagreeing or hating a presedent is not grounds for impeachment. If that was the case, we would have had many impeached presidents by now. If all you needed to do was hate, or disagree with the guy to make them go away. President George W would've had a really short term, Obama wouldn't have lasted a month. Come on. If President Trump does something impeachable I would support the impeachment, then eat a lot of crow. Maby it will happen, but that hasn't happened. Impending Impeachment??? There's nothing pending.
Open your eyes.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,272
You have to look at the entire population vs the number of people who are employed, that's the true measure. It's called the Hannity method. You have to do it that way so that you can include students, retirees, stay at home spouses, and people like my mother who takes care of her elderly mother full time. Doesn't matter if she isn't looking for work, she is unemployed so Obama needs to take the blame.
Yeah....but will Hannity calculate it this way now? I doubt it...
In the footage I saw of his arrest, he seems fairly young, a whole life ahead of him. I wonder what kind of deal he'll strike? Be turned back over to Russia and maybe end up dead? Tell all he knows and go into witness protection? Or spend the rest of his life in prison? Hmmmmmmmm, what's it going to be?
What has President Trump done that is impeachable? Disagreeing or hating a presedent is not grounds for impeachment. If that was the case, we would have had many impeached presidents by now. If all you needed to do was hate, or disagree with the guy to make them go away. President George W would've had a really short term, Obama wouldn't have lasted a month. Come on. If President Trump does something impeachable I would support the impeachment, then eat a lot of crow. Maby it will happen, but that hasn't happened. Impending Impeachment??? There's nothing pending.
Open your eyes.
Say, the day you trade in your Hemp Hat, for a Hard Hat, your eyes will be opened son.
Post edited by RYME on
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,272
What has President Trump done that is impeachable? Disagreeing or hating a presedent is not grounds for impeachment. If that was the case, we would have had many impeached presidents by now. If all you needed to do was hate, or disagree with the guy to make them go away. President George W would've had a really short term, Obama wouldn't have lasted a month. Come on. If President Trump does something impeachable I would support the impeachment, then eat a lot of crow. Maby it will happen, but that hasn't happened. Impending Impeachment??? There's nothing pending.
Open your eyes.
Say, the day you trade in your Hemp Hat, for a Hard Hat, your eyes will be opened son.
Trump's guiding principle is whatever he thinks is popular at the time.
Or personally profits himself
WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16 IL 08/18/18 IL 08/20/18 IT 07/05/2020AT 07/07/2020
The professor who took hell for predicting President Donald Trump has a much longer case for predicting President Mike Pence — and it’s all in his new book, out next week.
Allan Lichtman, a professor at American University, reached meme-status last fall for predicting long before anyone else that Trump would win, using a formula based on the popularity of the party in control of the White House that accurately predicted the eight previous presidential elections. Now Lichtman wants everyone to pay attention to the rest of what came through his crystal ball — that Trump will now be impeached.
The people who paid attention only to the professor’s first prediction include the commander in chief, whom Lichtman says reached out to him during the transition.
“Taking time out of preparing to become the world’s most powerful leader, he wrote me a personal note, saying ‘Professor — Congrats — good call,’” Lichtman writes in “The Case for Impeachment,” an advance copy of which was shared with POLITICO. “What Trump overlooked, however, was my ‘next big prediction’: that, after winning the presidency, he would be impeached.”
Lichtman is clearly no Trump fan, writing at length about his discomfort with Trump’s opposition to the Paris Climate accord. He refers to Trump’s travel ban as “dimming the torch of liberty” and heads one section of the book, “Trump’s policies and appointments pose an existential threat to humanity.”
The book, rushed to the presses after the election, provides a brief history of the thinking that led the Framers to include impeachment, and the behavior that led presidents to get impeached — counting Richard Nixon along with Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton (the two presidents who didn’t resign before the Articles of Impeachment were read in the House), Lichtman points out that one out of every 14 presidents has been impeached: “gamblers have become rich betting on longer odds than that.”
With a heavy hmm, he cites Johnson's obituary in The New York Times, which said the 17th president's fatal flaw was "he was always headstrong, 'sure he was right' even in his errors."
Several Democrats have predicted that the first thing they’d do if they win the House next year is impeach Trump. It may not take that long, Lichtman argues, writing that his book is meant to “explain how Trump threatens the institutions and traditions that have made America safe and free for 230 years, and I’ll make clear why a Republican Congress might impeach a president of its own party.”
Lichtman’s list of possible offenses that could get Trump to that point are familiar: charges of treason with Russia, abuse of power and emoluments violations. Lichtman also cites now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, then a senator, who argued that a president could be impeached for offenses committed before he took office. Among those potential offenses, Lichtman lists Trump’s housing violations, charity problems, potential violations of the Cuba embargo and Trump University.
It’s all part of a brief — designed to be damning — tour through Trump’s history. It includes section headings like “Trump Towers Become Vacant Lots” and “Lying His Way to the Presidency.” It eventually leads Lichtman to the conclusion that Trump might serve himself up for impeachment: “Trump’s disregard for lying in sworn testimony, examined in the context of the Bill Clinton precedent, shows how Trump’s opponents could set an impeachment trap for him through a civil lawsuit.”
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Imagine, Lichtman writes, if Trump gets Congress to lift sanctions against Russia by lying about some promise made by Vladimir Putin, or shakes the economy by lying about Bureau of Labor Statistics employment numbers.
Lichtman’s advice to Trump to avoid his prediction is a checklist that includes divesting, supporting the Paris Climate accord, using a fact-checker and treating women with respect. He also dares Trump to “add a shrink to the White House physicians.”
“Opponents will challenge your decision-making abilities and claim that they were right all along about your temperamental unfitness for the presidency, yet you have survived and thrived by defying the conventional political wisdom. Why not do it again?”
He also encourages Trump to “curb the Mussolini act” and fire chief strategist Steve Bannon.
President Andrew Johnson “showed how an impeachment and trial could benefit the nation,” Lichtman writes at one point. And he’s clearly rooting for that to happen now.
“Justice will be realized in today’s America not through revolution, but by the Constitution’s peaceful remedy of impeachment,” he concludes the book, “but only if the people demand it.”
Comments
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
Another dot to be connected. Don't let $59 million worth of missiles distract you from the real story.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
But is your grandmother a leftist? Or a globalist? Or a statist? Or all 3?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.amp.html
It's a felony isn't it to not disclose requested information on a federal, official form? I wonder if the Donald directed him to omit the information? Could come out in depositions or under questioning by the committee or in an official request for answers to typewritten questions. Wouldn't want to inconvenience the dear boy with trudging up the hill to testify and keep him from his really important work, now would we fellas?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/forms/sf0086.pdf
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Liberal bullshit like child labour laws and retirement have skewed the figures beyond recognition.
You have to do it that way so that you can include students, retirees, stay at home spouses, and people like my mother who takes care of her elderly mother full time. Doesn't matter if she isn't looking for work, she is unemployed so Obama needs to take the blame.
Disagreeing or hating a presedent is not grounds for impeachment. If that was the case, we would have had many impeached presidents by now. If all you needed to do was hate, or disagree with the guy to make them go away. President George W would've had a really short term, Obama wouldn't have lasted a month. Come on.
If President Trump does something impeachable I would support the impeachment, then eat a lot of crow. Maby it will happen, but that hasn't happened.
Impending Impeachment??? There's nothing pending.
Follow the money, from Russia with love, and the plea deals that lead to indictments, all the way to impeachment.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.google.com/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/39553250
Follow the money and the indictments all the way to impeachment. From Russia with love.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2017/04/11/fbi-obtained-fisa-warrant-monitor-former-trump-adviser-carter-page/FDl5q9mmIYoF7rRZS74xdN/story.html?s_campaign=bdc:globewell:politics
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ap-exclusive-manafort-firm-received-ukraine-ledger-payout/ar-BBzKrWA?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The Russia story just keeps getting worse for President Trump - CNN
https://apple.news/AvDXZTwxxQkOBkfHHhW5eiA
http://m.dailykos.com/story/2017/1/11/1619079/-Comparing-Presidential-Administrations-by-Arrests-and-Convictions-A-Warning-for-Trump-Appointees
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Prediction prof: Trump will be impeached
By Edward-Isaac Dovere
The professor who took hell for predicting President Donald Trump has a much longer case for predicting President Mike Pence — and it’s all in his new book, out next week.
Allan Lichtman, a professor at American University, reached meme-status last fall for predicting long before anyone else that Trump would win, using a formula based on the popularity of the party in control of the White House that accurately predicted the eight previous presidential elections. Now Lichtman wants everyone to pay attention to the rest of what came through his crystal ball — that Trump will now be impeached.
The people who paid attention only to the professor’s first prediction include the commander in chief, whom Lichtman says reached out to him during the transition.
“Taking time out of preparing to become the world’s most powerful leader, he wrote me a personal note, saying ‘Professor — Congrats — good call,’” Lichtman writes in “The Case for Impeachment,” an advance copy of which was shared with POLITICO. “What Trump overlooked, however, was my ‘next big prediction’: that, after winning the presidency, he would be impeached.”
Lichtman is clearly no Trump fan, writing at length about his discomfort with Trump’s opposition to the Paris Climate accord. He refers to Trump’s travel ban as “dimming the torch of liberty” and heads one section of the book, “Trump’s policies and appointments pose an existential threat to humanity.”
The book, rushed to the presses after the election, provides a brief history of the thinking that led the Framers to include impeachment, and the behavior that led presidents to get impeached — counting Richard Nixon along with Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton (the two presidents who didn’t resign before the Articles of Impeachment were read in the House), Lichtman points out that one out of every 14 presidents has been impeached: “gamblers have become rich betting on longer odds than that.”
With a heavy hmm, he cites Johnson's obituary in The New York Times, which said the 17th president's fatal flaw was "he was always headstrong, 'sure he was right' even in his errors."
Several Democrats have predicted that the first thing they’d do if they win the House next year is impeach Trump. It may not take that long, Lichtman argues, writing that his book is meant to “explain how Trump threatens the institutions and traditions that have made America safe and free for 230 years, and I’ll make clear why a Republican Congress might impeach a president of its own party.”
Lichtman’s list of possible offenses that could get Trump to that point are familiar: charges of treason with Russia, abuse of power and emoluments violations. Lichtman also cites now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, then a senator, who argued that a president could be impeached for offenses committed before he took office. Among those potential offenses, Lichtman lists Trump’s housing violations, charity problems, potential violations of the Cuba embargo and Trump University.
It’s all part of a brief — designed to be damning — tour through Trump’s history. It includes section headings like “Trump Towers Become Vacant Lots” and “Lying His Way to the Presidency.” It eventually leads Lichtman to the conclusion that Trump might serve himself up for impeachment: “Trump’s disregard for lying in sworn testimony, examined in the context of the Bill Clinton precedent, shows how Trump’s opponents could set an impeachment trap for him through a civil lawsuit.”
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.
Imagine, Lichtman writes, if Trump gets Congress to lift sanctions against Russia by lying about some promise made by Vladimir Putin, or shakes the economy by lying about Bureau of Labor Statistics employment numbers.
Lichtman’s advice to Trump to avoid his prediction is a checklist that includes divesting, supporting the Paris Climate accord, using a fact-checker and treating women with respect. He also dares Trump to “add a shrink to the White House physicians.”
“Opponents will challenge your decision-making abilities and claim that they were right all along about your temperamental unfitness for the presidency, yet you have survived and thrived by defying the conventional political wisdom. Why not do it again?”
He also encourages Trump to “curb the Mussolini act” and fire chief strategist Steve Bannon.
President Andrew Johnson “showed how an impeachment and trial could benefit the nation,” Lichtman writes at one point. And he’s clearly rooting for that to happen now.
“Justice will be realized in today’s America not through revolution, but by the Constitution’s peaceful remedy of impeachment,” he concludes the book, “but only if the people demand it.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2017/04/13/are-there-too-many-russia-connections-to-be-coincidences/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c:homepage/story&utm_term=.9c99e4cd9e63
Brilliant disappearing headlines just off into the ether, no basis in fact. Yea, sure.
Follow the money, from Russia with love, to an impeachment that can't come soon enough.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1