The Reign of Trump

[Brian Peacock]

R Stone:
We know Trump nominated for attorney general a man the Senate refused to confirm as a federal judge for being too racist in 1986, a year when it was still openly debated whether apartheid was all that bad.

Add it all up, and what do you see? A child who reacts to the slightest perceived attack with vicious vitriol. A vengeful president who is willing to violate basic rights. A government run by incompetents, racists, bullies and conspiracy-mongers.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/fe ... dy-w454640

If you take your views from the Rolling Stone (we will get sued for reporting a rape story with no evidence to back it up, but it follows our narrative.) You deserve to be a gullible moron who no one should take seriously.

You still haven't told us were we can get our reliable, untainted, officially authorised non-cuckist news from D-double-0. If you feel these articles are from unpalatable sources, from what teet are we to sup the golden nectar of honest reality?

[pErvinalia]

Honestly, I'm starting to feel bad for picking on Dave. It's like picking on a cripple.

Yeah right, when you can show I'm wrong (all people will be wrong on some measure) because I point out your inconsistency then get back to me. You lefty/libtards are going to have to realize you are not right by fiat and start to justify your position in reality.

You haven't posted a single fact in months, if not years. It's all just the same retarded drunken rant over and over.

[Hermit]

If it is generally believed that I only post when drunk, shouldn't the fact that you still have to indulge in fallacies, Ad hom, distraction and banning me be a cause for concern.

See if you can find a gap in your habitual state of drunkenness, then post this sentence again, but this time in English. Judging by it, and the ones that preceded it in the same post you're too far down the bottle now to write anything even just remotely sensible.

[Scot Dutchy]

If Dave did write in English would it really matter? Still the same word salad covered in shit.

[Hermit]

If Dave did write in English would it really matter? Still the same word salad covered in shit.

No, it would not, Scot Dutchy. It would be something comprehensible enough to agree or disagree with. Now fuck off to some other forum to bore its members into wanting to ban you. I bet that is the underlying reason for your ban at ratskep.

[Scot Dutchy]

If Dave did write in English would it really matter? Still the same word salad covered in shit.

No, it would not, Scot Dutchy. It would be something comprehensible enough to agree or disagree with. Now fuck off to some other forum to bore its members into wanting to ban you. I bet that is the underlying reason for your ban at ratskep.

Agree or disagree with the Dodo There is nothing to discuss in what he writes. Just right wing crap. Why was he banned from Ratskep? Writing crap the whole time. He is no better than Seth but for some unknown reason he is tolerated even though he insults all and sundry.

BTW I am not banned or even suspended not like the Dodo.

[Hermit]

Agree or disagree with the Dodo There is nothing to discuss in what he writes.

If that were the case you'd be the perfect match as far as not discussing things with him is concerned.

[Scot Dutchy]

Agree or disagree with the Dodo There is nothing to discuss in what he writes.

If that were the case you'd be the perfect match as far as not discussing things with him is concerned.

I dont want to waste my energy on a non-entity.

[Hermit]

Agree or disagree with the Dodo There is nothing to discuss in what he writes.

If that were the case you'd be the perfect match as far as not discussing things with him is concerned.

I dont want to waste my energy on a non-entity.

Then stop replying to his posts already.

[Scot Dutchy]

Dont tell me what to do. Who in the bloody hell do you think you are? I will comment on anything in this forum thank you.

[Hermit]

'Twas a friendly word of advice. People who are not bright enough to work out that the best solution to not wanting to waste energy on a non-entity is to stop wasting energy on said non-entity, need it. Don't thank me. The advice is free. I don't mind wasting energy on non-entities that are boring fucks.

[pErvinalia]

Dont tell me what to do. Who in the bloody hell do you think you are?

He's a cantankerous and lonely old goat.

[Hermit]

Dont tell me what to do. Who in the bloody hell do you think you are?

He's a cantankerous and lonely old goat.

Cantankerous? Yes. Old? Yes? Lonely? No.

[pErvinalia]

True. You get more pussy than me...

[Forty Two]

And doesn't a higher interest rate reduce the 'debt ceiling' the US operates under which could cripple or outright collapse the US economy as the interest on your debt alone meets or exceeds your tax revenues.

That's a huge problem with running up debt, which the Obama Admnistration did by getting us up over $20 trillion. But that has nothing to do with China or Japan selling their US Treasuries. It doesn't matter to us who holds the bonds. What matters is if nobody was willing to buy any new bonds.

Obama increased the national debt by 68%. G.W. Bush increased it by 101%. Trump's plan to cut taxes and increase military spending will put him in the same ball park.

Nearly 100% for Obama -- http://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/searc ... dYear=2016 He's added over $9 trillion to the total debt, and it was about $10.6 trillion when he took office.\\

Bush doubled the national debt too, but he only added about half the total amount that Obama has added - http://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/searc ... dYear=2009 (Bush added about $5 trillion or so, and Obama is on pace to break $10 trillion added).

I inputted the same dates for each president Starting at inauguration and ending at Obama's inauguration for Bush, and December 7, 2016 for Obama. So, Obama still has about six weeks to go, and it's racking up, of course.

If we give each President a pass for their first year, figuring most of their first year budget was set outside of their control, then here is Bush's number - http://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/searc ... dYear=2010 (less than $6 trillion added for 8 years) And, Obama would be here at the moment http://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/searc ... dYear=2016 (12.3 trillion to almost $20 trillion, or about $7.7 trillion added, with one year to go, and so he'd probable wind up at about $8.5 to $9 trillion -- still much more than Bush).


those are the numbers from the US Treasury -- what's your source?