Thursday, September 13, 2018

Obama Economy vs Trump by The Numbers

Image may contain: text

Fact check,org

Obama’s Final Numbers

Statistical indicators of President Obama's eight years in office.

Obama’s Final Numbers

Statistical indicators of President Obama's eight years in office.


The numbers are nearly all in now. What they show about what really happened during the eight years that Barack Obama was president is sometimes different from what politicians claimed.
  • The economy gained a net 11.6 million jobs. The unemployment rate dropped to below the historical norm.
  • Average weekly earnings for all workers were up 4.0 percent after inflation. The gain was 3.7 percent for just production and nonsupervisory employees.
  • After-tax corporate profits also set records, as did stock prices. The S&P 500 index rose 166 percent.
  • The number of people lacking health insurance dropped by 15 million. Premiums rose, but more slowly than before.
  • The federal debt owed to the public rose 128 percent. Deficits were rising as Obama departed.
  • Home prices rose 20 percent. But the home ownership rate hit the lowest point in half a century.
  • Illegal immigration declined: The Border Patrol caught 35 percent fewer people trying to get into the U.S. from Mexico.
  • Wind and solar power increased 369 percent. Coal production declined 38 percent. Carbon emissions from burning fossil fuel dropped 11 percent.
  • Production of handguns rose 192 percent, to a record level.
  • The murder rate dropped to the lowest on record in 2014, then rose and finished at about the same rate as when Obama took office.
Gathering statistics is a painstaking and time-consuming job. Figures on crime, household incomes and poverty in 2016 weren’t released until September 2017, for example.
But now we have a reasonably complete statistical picture of the Obama years, which began in the middle of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and ended with the highest level of household income ever recorded.
These facts often turn out to be at odds with the impressions created by candidates who, for example, claimed wages and incomes were stagnant when in fact they were rising. The facts also can conflict with impressions created by news media reporting dramatic but untypical events. Despite nonstop coverage of several mass shootings, for example, the murder rate was going down for most of the Obama years, hitting the lowest ever recorded in 2014.
Some of these figures remain subject to tweaks and revisions. Figures on handgun production in 2016 are still “preliminary,” for example, and others will remain subject to slight revisions for years to come, as statisticians routinely refine their methods and assumptions. We will keep this update current as necessary in the months and years to come. For now, it’s as “final” as possible.
Update, Feb. 14, 2018: We updated this article and its graphics to reflect that the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ annual “benchmarking” revisions added more than 150,000 jobs to its previously reported figure for January 2017, bringing the total added under Obama to more than 11.6 million (up from 11.5 million), an 8.7 percent increase (up from 8.6 percent).We also updated a graphic in the “Immigration” section to reflect that the U.S. Border Patrol revised its figures on people caught while illegally trying to cross the U.S.-Mexico border upward by four for calendar year 2016.

Friday, September 7, 2018

Trump's attack on free Press Continue

Image result for attack on free press

Trump's fascist tendencies are emergence more powerfully all the time. He's brimming with hatred for the press and wants to hamstring them gutless and cowardly.,  in USA TODAY quptes his tweets:

Whenever you see the words 'sources say' in the fake news media, and they don't mention names.... is very possible that those sources don't exist but are made up by fake news writers. is the enemy!
He went so far as to say that whenever stories "don't mention names... it is very possible that those sources don't exist but are made up by fake news writers. #FakeNews is the enemy!"
But apparently that strong dislike for anonymous sources didn't keep him from tweeting on Tuesday a story that relies exclusively on a single anonymous source, though.[1]
Anonymity is essential for whistle blowers. Trumps wants to shame analogous sources as gutless but that does not preclude  free speech, neither does the possibility that quotes are made up. But we know good reporters are responsible with using anonymous quotes. Some even go to jail to protect their sources. No one who is lazy enough to makeup a quote would  go to jail to extend the hoax.

Image result for attack on free press

Now Trump's fascism leads him to attack the right to protest,He wants to make protesting illegal.

President Trump has long derided the mainstream media as the “enemy of the people” and lashed out at NFL players for kneeling during the national anthem. On Tuesday, he took his attacks on free speech one step further, suggesting in an interview with a conservative news site that the act of protesting should be illegal.
Trump made the remarks in an Oval Office interview with the Daily Caller hours after his Supreme Court nominee, Brett M. Kavanaugh, was greeted by protests on the first day of his confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill.
“I don’t know why they don’t take care of a situation like that,” Trump said. “I think it’s embarrassing for the country to allow protesters. You don’t even know what side the protesters are on.”
He added: “In the old days, we used to throw them out. Today, I guess they just keep screaming.” Trump has bristled at dissent in the past, including several instances in which he has suggested demonstrators should lose their jobs or be met with violence for speaking out.[2]

That would obviously  be a major infringement upon the first amendment. The fake President is not a friend of the Bill of rights,that;s the way I knew it would be. If the Republicans win the mid terms there will be no one to restrain Trump's fascism. This may be the most important election in   our history. Please vote, and make sure your fiends vote. Let everyone you know understand the issues and the dangers and what we are facing! Please do not let up util the election is over!

Image result for attack on free press

[1] "Trump hates anonymous sources, unless they're in stories favorable to him"
 USA TODAY (May 30, 2017 | Updated 2:31 p.m. ET May 30, 2017)

[2] Felicia Sonmez"Trump Suggests that protesting should be illegal," Washington Post,

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

The Fake President is a Crook

"So now it’s confirmed, as a matter of legal record, that President Donald Trump organized a scheme to violate federal election laws. He directed his longtime personal attorney to pay at least one woman for silence. That attorney got the money by lying to a bank to get a home-equity line of credit.

Read More:


Thursday, July 26, 2018

Republican Moves to Silence Muller

Image result for Republicans Move to impeach Rosenstein

Trump threatens to revoke Obama era security clearances, this is a brazen attempt to silence criticism and prevent   testimony for Muller's investigation of Russian collusion.."The main thing these former Obama administration officials have in common is a desire to tell the truth. What does Trump not want us to know about?"[1] these Include: "former CIA Director John Brennan, an NBC News contributor; former FBI Director James B. Comey; former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden; former National Security Adviser Susan E. Rice; former Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr.; and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe."[2] No illegality or misconduct has been alleged.

And although some conservatives, including Sen. Rand Paul, claim these public servants are somehow “monetizing” their clearances, there is no evidence to suggest that any of them are hawking classified data in return for cash payments. In fact, if the president had any reason to suspect that these outspoken critics were disclosing national secrets, he would likely have them in handcuffs before their next television appearance.[3]
Frank Figliuzzi was assistant director of  FBI counter intelligence . He explains why they extend security clearances beyond the administration of one's time in office:
When I retired from that position, I maintained my clearance for a year. This wasn’t because I enjoyed filling out thick, mind-numbing documents that ask for the Vehicle Identification Numbers on my cars, the addresses of temporary, corporate apartments I lived in seven years ago, or because I relished the prospect of being hooked up to a polygraph machine and asked if I socialized with foreign intelligence officers (yes, many allied officers). The FBI asked me to do this for the sake of continuity, transition and maintenance of institutional knowledge. I agreed.This is just common sense. If the FBI or other intelligence agency had a question about some investigative decision, strategy discussion, or policy issue, they wanted the ability to reach out, brief me on the issue and seamlessly move forward in securing our nation from threats. When that transition period ended, the FBI allowed my clearance to lapse. For someone who was the director of an agency, the period can last much longer. If my clearances were still in place today, perhaps I too would be subject to Trump’s call to revoke clearances of people who he doesn’t like.[4]
It is not a threat to current security that they do this. Paul's criticism, is ignorant as is Trump's. The idea that they make  money off of the clearances is wrong.

Those kinds of security clearances are not particularly lucrative for people who have had the top jobs. That is not why they maintain them, but Trump probably has no idea that that is the case. Rather, he apparently thinks that he can punish his enemies by going after their wallets, not realizing that Michael Hayden’s speaking fees and book advances will go up if the White House manages to pull his code-word tickets. He does not understand the value assigned by the insiders to their predecessors’ experience or the mentality of people who want to continue to serve their country even in semiretirement. Quiet patriotism—as opposed to the flag-waving, wall-building, ally-bashing, threat-tweeting brand of nationalism that Trump has ridden to the presidency—is beyond him.[5]
The reason they want to pull security clearances from these people is because they acknowledged that Russia conducted cyber attacks upon the U.S. electoral process and they have been critical of Trump's refusal to defend American  security agaisnt Putin.

On another front Republican desperation can be seen in a new attempt at shutting down the the Muller probe. Eleven house republicans have put up articles of impeachment against Rod Rosestein who is Muller's boss in DOJ. With Rosenstein out a Trump-biased new boss would pt more pressure on Muller or even shut his investigation down directly, [6]

The five articles charge Rosenstein of "high crimes and misdemeanors" for failing to produce information to the committees, even though the department has already provided lawmakers with more than 800,000 documents, and of signing off on what some Republicans say was improper surveillance of a Trump adviser.The resolution also goes directly after Rosenstein for his role in the ongoing Mueller investigation, criticizing him for refusing to produce a memo that outlines the scope of that investigation and questioning whether the investigation was started on legitimate grounds. Mueller is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether Trump's campaign was in any way involved.[7]
The move is not backed by all republicans, it is not clear that it has the votes to succeed, Speaker Ryan is said to be Against  the move. [8] The problem is, aside from the fact that it could succeed, is the fact that  a faction loyal to the alleged President Russian intervention investigated. That is pretty serious, If this as 9/11 what would be the reaction at Republican congressmen saying this is a witch hunt we should not investigate this attack on the world trade center? What if Obama was saying we don't need to investigate attacks by Russia upon our elections especially because they benefited me and got me elected? We the Republicans would never let Obama get away with that. This transcends politics we can't afford to allow the Republicans to  silence Muller.

Call Your congressman: 202-224-3121

Demand that Muller be allowed to conduct his investigation and that Rosenstein not be impeached,


[1]Frank Figliuzzi , "Trump's treat To Revoke Obama Era Security Clearances Is a Brazen Attempt to Silence Critics..."  Think , published by NBC News (
(accessed 7/26/18)

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] , "Pulling Security Clearances Is Just the Start, The Atlantic (JUL 25, 2018) (accessed 7/26/18)

[6] Mary Clare Jalonick, "GOP Leaders Move to Impeach Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein," Chicago Tribune, associated press, (July 26,2018)
(accessed 7/26/18)

[7] Ibid


Sunday, July 22, 2018

Majority Disprove of Trump but not as much as they should

The Post-ABC poll conducted Wednesday through Friday finds that overall, 33 percent of Americans approve of Trump's handling of his meeting with Putin while 50 percent disapprove. A sizable 18 percent say they have no opinion. A slightly larger 56 percent disapprove of Trump expressing doubts about U.S. intelligence agencies' conclusion that Russia tried to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. On both questions, those who say they "strongly disapprove" of Trump's performance outnumber those who say they "strongly approve" by better than 2 to 1.

Tuesday, July 17, 2018

Is Trump Right To sit with Putin?

Image result for Trump

I am listening to Rand Paul, good little Trump attack dog, defending his master by saying even Reagan did not confront Gorbachev with the evils of the USSR when they met with him. True but he also did not throw his intelligence agents under the bus and say:I have no reason to doubt Putin," My Trumpie friend says "he did not say that" yes he did, That is what his words meant, He did not use those very words but hes aid it, He did say:I have no reason not to accept Putin's word, but what about the fact that Putin is a dictator? A murderer,a liar? are those not reasons? What about the fact that all our security people agree that Russia did work to destabilize us in the election? The reason he gives for trusting Putin? "He denied it in such a strong and powerful,way!" He voice so caressing those words as he spoke. So it is as though strong and powerful = right. I say Rand, old man,I would buy your argument iff we had a messenger I could trust. If Our guy talking to Putin was trustworthy I would say yes sit down with him and talk amiably about our aims and theirs. But we don;t have anyone like that.. We have a liar who clearly puts Putin;s interest above our own

Sunday, July 15, 2018