***Official Political Discussion Thread***

RustyShackleford said:
You said the past comments are current figures are not mutually exclusive.

They are though.

Measureable economic activity and observable reality tells us that we didn't cut our employment levels that much and such small increases in GDP growth and inflation.

He was lying in 2016 and you just refuse to admit it.
Click to expand...

He stated what he believed in 2016. He can believe something that isn't true (a lot of people do). But, even if that wasn't a lie, I'm sure he lied in 2016. I imagine most people on this thread told a lie in 2016. That aside, what say you about the current unemployment rate under Trump?
 
:lol:
The UK's economy is still in the slow lane too. Who would've seen that coming.
What a ****show.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-must-be-extended-u-k-officials-said-to-think
Brexit Transition Must Be Extended, According to U.K. Officials
15076f8e9680030f4aaba9a200051ccb.png

The Brexit transition period will need to be extended potentially for years because any new customs regime will not be ready to come into force in time, according to senior British officials.

In what would be a politically explosive decision, the U.K. will have to stay inside the European customs union beyond the transition period’s end date of December 2020 while new border measures are developed, said two people familiar with the Brexit talks. It’s not government policy, but is being discussed by senior officials.

Conservative Party Chairman Brandon Lewis --who is also a government minister -- was asked directly on BBC Radio on Friday whether the U.K. would be staying in the customs union until 2023. He didn’t deny it, saying the Cabinet would be “making some decisions on that.” Until now, the official policy has been that the U.K. will leave the EU’s customs regime at the end of 2020.

Prime Minister Theresa May is already under intense pressure over the future of Britain’s customs arrangements from rival factions within her divided Conservative Party, following a Cabinet split on Wednesday. Passionate Brexit campaigners such as Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson fear May will tie the U.K. too closely to the EU’s trade regime.


On the other side, Tories who want to keep the U.K. inside the customs union are plotting to join the opposition Labour Party to defeat May in a crucial vote on the issue that could come later this month. If she agrees to either side’s demands, May faces a backlash that could see her ousted from power.

“Although May will try to somehow find a compromise that would keep the pro- and anti-EU factions of her party on board, that will be extremely difficult,” said Mujtaba Rahman, managing director at Eurasia Group. “Once again, her authority is on the wane.”

According to two people familiar with the matter, May and her divided cabinet now have two key decisions to make: first, what kind of customs deal they want with the European Union, and then what temporary measures will apply until the new system is operational.

The most obvious answer to the second question is to extend the U.K.’s transitional membership of the customs union beyond its current end date of the end of December 2020, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the matter is sensitive.

The option of extending the U.K.’s membership of the customs union is not official government policy and hasn’t been formally proposed in negotiations with the EU in Brussels. But the idea is in circulation in May’s team and it’s something she will need to address.

Another person familiar with the negotiations said the EU would be ready to accept such an idea, which could involve a four- or five-year extension to customs union membership.

The U.K. government is at a critical crossroads as it seeks to decide the question of Britain’s future customs arrangements with the EU after Brexit. On Wednesday, May’s Brexit “war cabinet” of senior ministers failed to agree on what kind of customs deal to seek with the EU at a tense meeting in London.

The prime minister’s own preferred option for a tight customs “partnership” with the bloc was rejected by more than half of the ministers in the group, in a blow to her authority and a set back for the Brexit negotiations.
Click to expand...
 
dwalk31 said:
He stated what he believed in 2016. He can believe something that isn't true (a lot of people do). But, even if that wasn't a lie, I'm sure he lied in 2016. I imagine most people on this thread told a lie in 2016. That aside, what say you about the current unemployment rate under Trump?
Click to expand...
Trump lied about readily available economic data while running for president to get votes. He lies were not some innocent White lies. His supporters took him seriously.

And what do i say about current figures...I say that it is continuation of trends that started under the previous adminstration.

Just like your graph shows.
 
Last edited:
Mark Antony said:
Welp, industries are starting to die.
Click to expand...

If the price of crab shoots up... Should be more lucrative then people who wouldn't go into that industry may be enticed to.. As much as it pains me to say it... Trumps policies could create higher paying jobs. Living in Vegas the question becomes how long until housekeeping and food service jobs go vacant at these hyuuuge hotels. Time will tell.
 
Romney talking about all the hot dogs and hamburgers he eats, is like hearing Palin talking about news papers she reads.
 
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/pence-doctor-resigns-after-jackson-debacle-569004
Pence doctor resigns after Jackson debacle
Vice President Mike Pence’s physician has resigned, the latest fallout from the collapse of Ronny Jackson’s nomination for secretary of Veterans Affairs.
Dr. Jennifer Peña, who like Jackson is a military physician detailed to the White House, was among those who made claims of professional misconduct against Jackson to senators considering his nomination, according to a person familiar with the events.
“The Vice President’s office was informed today by the White House Medical Unit of the resignation. Physicians assigned to the Vice President report to the White House Medical Unit and thus any resignation would go entirely through the Medical Unit, not the Vice President’s office,” Pence spokeswoman Alyssa Farah said in a statement.

Peña claimed in memos that Jackson might have violated Karen Pence’s patient privacy rights by sharing details of a medical incident involving the second lady with chief of staff John Kelly. The memos were first reported by CNN.

The allegations were troubling to many in Pence’s office and the White House, who felt that Peña misrepresented the severity of the situation in an effort to harm Jackson, according to the person familiar with the situation.

Jackson, a Navy rear admiral who served as a physician to President Barack Obama and continued in the West Wing to care for Trump, was nominated in late March to succeed former VA Secretary David Shulkin.

Jackson withdrew from consideration on April 26 after Montana Sen. Jon Tester, the ranking Democrat on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, released a document summarizing allegations by 23 current and former colleagues that the doctor overprescribed pills, drank on the job and created a hostile work environment.

Jackson has denied the allegations and has returned to work in the White House, though not as Trump’s physician. He was succeeded in that role by Sean Conley, another Navy officer.

Trump has fumed over Tester’s role in derailing Jackson’s nomination, calling on him to resign and encouraging Montanans to vote against him in November.
Click to expand...
 
They'll presumably never set foot in a US court but they sent a few lawyers in what appears to be an attempt to fish for nonpublic sensitive information about the case and the investigation through discovery requests.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627
Mueller seeks delay in case alleging Russians interfered in U.S. presidential election
Prosecutors from special counsel Robert Mueller’s office are seeking to delay the first court hearing in a criminal case charging three Russian companies and 13 Russian citizens with using social media and other means to foment strife among Americans in advance of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The 13 people charged in the high-profile indictment in February are considered unlikely to ever appear in a U.S. court. The three businesses accused of facilitating the alleged Russian troll farm operation — the Internet Research Agency, Concord Management and Consulting, and Concord Catering — were also expected to simply ignore the American criminal proceedings.


Last month, however, a pair of Washington-area lawyers suddenly surfaced in the case, notifying the court that they represent Concord Management. POLITICO reported at the time that the move appeared to be a bid to force Mueller’s team to turn over relevant evidence to the Russian firm and perhaps even to bait prosecutors into an embarrassing dismissal in order to avoid disclosing sensitive information.

On Friday, Mueller’s prosecutors disclosed that Concord’s attorneys, Eric Dubelier and Kate Seikaly, had made a slew of discovery requests demanding nonpublic details about the case and the investigation. Prosecutors also asked a judge to postpone the formal arraignment of Concord Management set for next week.

The prosecution team sought the delay on the grounds that it’s unclear whether Concord Management formally accepted the court summons related to the case. Mueller’s prosecutors also revealed that they tried to deliver the summonses for Concord and IRA through the Russian government, without success.

“The [U.S.] government has attempted service of the summonses by delivering copies of them to the Office of the Prosecutor General of Russia, to be delivered to the defendants,” prosecutors wrote. “That office, however, declined to accept the summonses. The government has submitted service requests to the Russian government pursuant to a mutual legal assistance treaty. To the government’s knowledge, no further steps have been taken within Russia to effectuate service.”

Mueller’s team sent a copy of the formal summons to Dubelier and Seikaly and asked them to accept it on behalf of Concord Management, but Dubelier wrote back on Monday saying that the government’s attempt to serve the summons was defective under court rules. He did not elaborate.

Dubelier did not respond to a message seeking comment for this article.

In their request on Friday to put off the arraignment, prosecutors included the extensive requests for information that the lawyers for Concord Management have set forth since they stepped forward last month.

“Until the Court has an opportunity to determine if Concord was properly served, it would be inadvisable to conduct an initial appearance and arraignment at which important rights will be communicated and a plea entertained,” attorneys Jeannie Rhee, Rush Atkinson and Ryan Dickey wrote. “That is especially true in the context of this case, which involves a foreign corporate defendant, controlled by another, individual foreign defendant, that has already demanded production of sensitive intelligence gathering, national security, and foreign affairs information.”

The Mueller team proposed that both sides file briefs on the issues of whether Concord has been properly served, with the government filing on May 25 and Concord’s lawyers weighing in by June 15.

Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, didn’t immediately rule on that proposal or put off the arraignment. She did issue a brief order telling Concord’s attorneys to respond to the government’s filing by Monday.

The indictment, obtained by Mueller but announced by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, accused the defendants of mounting an “information warfare” operation in connection with the 2016 election. The IRA, long suspected of ties to the Kremlin, allegedly used social media, email and other means to manipulate “unwitting” American citizens and Trump campaign officials into protests, demonstrations and the recirculation of media messages. Most of the interventions were intended to benefit Trump or demean his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, the indictment alleged.
Click to expand...
 
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-probes-cohen-over-cash-he-built-up-during-campaign-1525478682
U.S. Probes Cohen Over Cash He Built Up During Campaign
Trump’s lawyer took out lines of credit to secure access to as much as $774,000 as race heated up
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, gained access to as much as $774,000 through two financial transactions during the 2016 presidential campaign as he sought to fix problems for his boss, public records show.

Those transactions could factor into a broad investigation of Mr. Cohen’s business affairs being conducted by Manhattan federal prosecutors and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, who are examining whether Mr. Cohen violated any laws in his efforts to raise cash and conceal negative information about Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the matter. Those include transactions tied to his credit line and his ownership of real estate and taxi medallions, the people said.

In February 2016, as Mr. Trump’s fortunes as a presidential candidate rose, Mr. Cohen nearly doubled the amount he could use on a bank credit line tied to his Manhattan apartment, increasing his ability to borrow by $245,000, according to real-estate records.

Three months earlier, he gained potential access to another $529,000, through a new mortgage that he and his wife cosigned on a condominium owned by her parents at Trump World Tower, a Trump building in New York, separate real-estate records show.

Mr. Cohen and his lead attorney didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Cohen, who has described himself as Mr. Trump’s fixer, has said he used his home-equity line of credit to make a $130,000 payment to former adult-film actress Stephanie Clifford—known professionally as Stormy Daniels—in exchange for her agreeing less than two weeks before the presidential election to stay silent about an alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani said this week that Mr. Cohen resolved other problems similarly for Mr. Trump, although he didn’t specify what they were or the source of funds that were used.

As part of a broad effort to determine how Mr. Cohen got access to cash and what he did with it, federal prosecutors and the FBI are examining whether Mr. Cohen committed bank fraud by making false statements inflating the value of his assets to obtain loans or by misstating the intended purpose of the loans, these people said.

Investigators also are examining whether he violated federal election law by making unreported campaign contributions exceeding the federal limit of $5,400 to Mr. Trump in that election cycle, as well as possible other crimes stemming from his payments to cover up problems, the people said.

Prosecutors will want to document “every penny” flowing through Mr. Cohen’s accounts during the presidential campaign, said Alex Little, a former federal prosecutor in Washington who is now a defense lawyer and has no firsthand knowledge of the Cohen investigation.

Mr. Cohen opened a home-equity line of credit for $500,000 at First Republic Bank on Feb. 24, 2016, tied to a condominium at Trump Park Avenue in Manhattan that he and his wife own through trusts, the real-estate records show. The loan documents were signed by Mr. Cohen’s wife, Laura, as trustee for the trusts in their names that own the apartment, the records show.

A few weeks later, the Cohens closed out an old home-equity line for $255,000 with TD Bank N.A. tied to the same unit, the records show. Both First Republic and TD Bank declined to comment.

The new, higher equity line gave Mr. Cohen the ability to borrow at least $245,000 more than before against his home during the campaign, the records show.

It isn’t clear whether Mr. Cohen tapped the credit line to settle problems for Mr. Trump other than Ms. Clifford or for personal reasons.

As Mr. Cohen increased his credit, Mr. Trump, a political novice, maintained a strong lead in polls over veteran politicians in a crowded field and was heading into the primary season while debating his rivals. He lost the Iowa caucuses on Feb. 1 but won the New Hampshire primary on Feb. 9. Mr. Trump won the Nevada caucuses on Feb. 23, the day before Mr. Cohen secured the new loan.

Mr. Cohen’s near-doubling of his credit line in February 2016, as Mr. Trump’s chances seemed to be improving, “could become an incredibly important date in a case of this type,” Mr. Little said. Prosecutors will want to develop facts around the credit line to determine why Mr. Cohen needed the money, he said.

A search warrant obtained by federal investigators for an April 9 raid of Mr. Cohen’s home, hotel room and law office authorized seizure of documents related to Ms. Clifford and the $130,000 payment in October 2016; a former Playboy model paid $150,000 by the National Enquirer publisher in an August 2016 deal preventing her from discussing an alleged affair with Mr. Trump; and Mr. Cohen’s taxi medallions, the people familiar with the matter said.

Mr. Trump and his representatives have denied he had sexual encounters with Ms. Clifford or the Playboy model, Karen McDougal.

Mr. Giuliani this week said the president had reimbursed Mr. Cohen for the Clifford payment through a $35,000-a-month retainer, and indicated Mr. Trump reimbursed Mr. Cohen for other matters as well. Mr. Giuliani also suggested on Fox News this week that the payment was related to the campaign. On Friday, he said it would have been done whether the campaign was under way or not.

The president confirmed the retainer in tweets on Thursday. But on Friday, he appeared to dispute his lawyer’s statements, telling reporters that “virtually everything said has been said incorrectly,” and that Mr. Giuliani, who only recently joined his legal team, would soon “get his facts straight.”

The nine-month gap between the time Mr. Cohen obtained his new credit line and the payment to Ms. Clifford could work against him, said Adam Schuman, a former federal prosecutor in Brooklyn.

“If he didn’t anticipate using these funds to assist with these types of third-party payments, then why did he still have the funds to pay Stormy Daniels if they were intended for some earlier, innocuous purpose?” Mr. Schuman said.

Three months before he increased the home-equity line, Mr. Cohen gained potential access to another $529,000 in cash, through the fresh mortgage on the condominium owned by his wife’s parents, Fima and Ania Shusterman.

The Shustermans didn’t immediately return messages left at mobile phone numbers listed in a commercial database.

Mr. Cohen and his wife cosigned the $2 million mortgage on the condo in November 2015, New York real-estate records show, although they hadn’t signed prior mortgages on the property.

The borrowers took out $529,000 in cash, in addition to refinancing existing debt on the condo, which the Shustermans bought in 2004 and used as their primary New York residence. It isn’t clear whether or how the money was spent.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cragmatic
Hikers of NT - Official Hiking Thread
2 3
Replies
51
Views
3K
cragmatic
cragmatic
chezzer10
***MLB FEET, EQUIPMENT, AND UNIFORMS 2024***NEW THREAD
3 4 5
Replies
106
Views
16K
mp23
mp23
feeninlikejodeci
Tactics to scare Landlord?
Replies
12
Views
2K
feeninlikejodeci
feeninlikejodeci
Brownstone
Buzzer Beaters Only Thread
Replies
8
Views
697
Public Enemy
Public Enemy
therealest1
Nike Air Max Sunder
Replies
4
Views
3K
1978S
1978S

Latest News

View All News

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom