LOL... It's so funny when people try to blame others for their own illiteracy.

That's just a really stupid thing to say. We're talking about the presidency, not some Hollywood version of a mob boss.

Let me explain how you are demonstrating your own stupidity...

1. The use of the terms "bat-crap" and "freaks" says more about your own emotional reaction than it does about the people in the photos.
2. There is no evidence in ANY of these photos that these people were being hysterical. All that is evident is that they were vocalizing, a few look like they were shouting while others look more like they were singing or chanting.
3. The photos offer no context other than being in a court room, so we don't know what they were protesting or even what political side they stand for. I've seen enough Tea Party rallies to know that expressions of anger and defiance look the same on all sides.
4. There is no evidence that these people were paid by anyone to protest.
5. There is no evidence that any political party pays ANYONE to protest and very suggestion is incredibly childish.

Finally...

6. This is what civil disobedience looks like. Welcome to the side of America that's willing to fight for liberty and justice. Yes, I admire them for speaking their minds and for standing up for what they believe. It's a lot more than I can say for the submissive sheep following Trump.

If anyone is mistaken it's you and Mikey. You are both claiming investment returns that veer dramatically from the average index, which is a sign that you are both full of sh*t or making some really bad investments. If you were making good investments your bottom line would have been increasing for the last 8 years at roughly the same rate. But if your yields have improved since Trump took over as much as you say they have it means you were either missing a lot of opportunities before Trump or you are now investing in some very risky assets... or it could be both.

Well, it's a good thing your 50 years of flat investments got that 2 year shot of Trump at the end, eh? ...LOL


Wow... broken record. You already made this statement and I came back with a chart that shows the boom started in 2009 and your response to ignore that completely and just repeat the same ridiculous statement. Willful Ignorance 101.


LOL, Well that's a LOT of BS there Mikey... I'm not going to bother with the gay, Muslim, Marxist drama, but let's look at that 4.2%... First of all Mr. Money Expert, GDP is a sum not a ratio. I think what you mean to say is growth rate.


Secondly, it's a short-term number... 4.2% is the growth rate for one quarter. That's just three months. Even a bad investment can push the growth rate for a quarter before crashing. So try not to get too excited. Besides, contrary to Trump's delusions, it's not the best growth rate in "U.S. history". there have been several quarters under Obama with better growth. 4.7% in Q4 2011, 5.1% in Q2 2014 and 4.9% in Q3 2014.

Sorry, didn't mean to offend... I assumed with a handle like "youngwilliam" you were a male, not a female.

Well, one thing is certain... you don't get the whole truth from school, especially K-12.


I agree that capital investment assumed a much larger share of American politics after the Civil War and the Federal Reserve is probably the most scandalous aspect of that change.

One of the more recent departures from America's foundation is the business of trade negotiation. According to the Constitution's Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3), Congress is supposed to handle the regulation of foreign trade, not the president. That changed through a series of "fast-track" exceptions mostly during the power-hungry Bush Administration and now we have Trump assuming complete control over trade negotiations, resulting in a chaotic pile of trade wars that I think is damaging a lot of American industry.

I'm curious about your take on this.

ZZZZ.... Where are the conservatives that can actually present an argument instead of just saying "Nuh-uh! Nuh-uh!"

There is nothing theoretical or "wishful" about the Emoluments Clause. Nor is there anything theoretical or "wishful" about the records and receipts that show diplomatic missions spending money at Trump resorts. I'm not Q-Anon, theorizing on pedophilia and human sacrifices. I'm sticking to facts here. Trump has violated the U.S. Constitution. That's not even a question. The only question that remains is whether Trump can get away with it or not.

Oh, I care... I just haven't been convinced.

Dude, you're posting on an open forum that we can all see and comment on. So deal with it.

Not really. I've seen hundred of hours of video about it too, but I find gaping flaws in all of them and I'm kinda burned out at this point. Maybe you can describe the essential basis for your claim instead of asking me to watch more videos?

LOL... Not something I'd want to see.

Moldy was obviously bringing up Benghazi to point out the hypocrisy of your statement - "If they had any evidence it would have come out long ago." Indeed, you people have been trying to make a case out of Benghazi for way longer than 2 years without success. So according to your statement, Clinton is not responsible for what happened in Benghazi.

But don't let that confuse you... you just concentrate on the point your trying to make... Moldy and I can make side comments AND still follow along. it's not a problem for us, really.

What did I just tell you about "future tense"? There ARE no charges yet, there is only evidence of crime, the investigations need to wrap up before charges can be brought to court.


The evidence HAS been out. Evidence is not what's slowing the process down. The fact that we're talking about the President of the united States is what's slowing the process down. It's not like prosecuting a shop lifter.


If it was, you wouldn't be commenting on it. ;)

It's not over 'til the fat lady sings. ;)