The First 100 days

She got totally rolled by the FBI who fed her a line of BS about child molestation at Waco. The FBI lied to get their way? And people think this started with Trump in the WH.

 

Considering that Ruby Ridge had happened a few months before Waco, but on GHWB's watch, I think the FBI and Dept of Injustice were really not to be trusted in those days. So you're right; nothing has changed much.

 

US
1st Q GDP - (+2.2%)
2nd Q GDP - (+4.2%)
3rd Q GDP - (+3.5%)


Germany
1st Q GDP - (+0.4%)
2nd Q GDP - (+0.5%)
3rd Q GDP - (-0.2%)


France
1st Q GDP - (+0.2%)
2nd Q GDP - (+0.2%)
3rd Q GDP - (+0.4%)

 

Dont forget the ATF. And, in any event, even if the allegations were true, killing abused children does not save them.


Two things I recall from those days --
(1) Koresh was a regular jogger who went frequent long runs down local country roads. I can remember seeing the ATF surveillance fotos of him doing this. Thus, it would have been easy to nab him at almost any time in a risk-free manner.
(2) Another idea I recall we kicked around at the time was just put a temporary fence around the place, and then withdraw.

Point being there were many options other than the ones they took. Reno herself admitted on national TV that "the buck stopped" with her. But, of course, being a Democrat, that meant absolutely nothing. Whatever personnel and organizational repercussions that resulted from Waco stopped a couple of levels before it ever got to her. LOL

 

JF
Do you think there are lessons to be learned from those stats? Think any Dem will learn anything?

 

Looks like 4Q US will come in somewhere in the low 3's

Policy matters.
Obama's “stimulus” went towards food stamps, unemployment benefits, ObamaCare subsidies, “cash for clunkers,” failed green energy handouts, with perhaps the largest chunk going to Unions (esp the teachers' unions) as payback for helping win the election.
Trump's focus has been aimed at incentivizing businesses to invest, hire and produce more.

But, no, they will never admit anything until after Trump dies. Then they will tell us how great they thought he was. There are a lot of parallels with Reagan in this topical area.
---------

Here is a good WSJ article on this if you have access
Opinion | The Trump Boom Is No Mere ‘Sugar High’

"Liberals are tripping over themselves to explain why the economy has performed so much better under Donald Trump than it did under Barack Obama. The economy has grown by nearly 4% over the past six months, and the final number for 2018 is expected to come in at between 3% and 3.5%. The U.S. growth rate has doubled since Mr. Obama's last year in office ...."​

 

I have been wondering myself where this might end up

My sense is that Trump is correct here. I dont know about the House machinations, but if they were somehow able to get a conviction through the Senate, then its easy to see some open rebellion. People are going to be angry if this election is taken away from them. Maybe even another Oklahoma City. I would definitely not want to be working in a federal building in the days, weeks and months after in that event.

"President Trump said Tuesday night he is not concerned about getting impeached when Democrats take control of the House next year and argued "people would revolt" if they tried.

"It’s hard to impeach somebody who hasn’t done anything wrong and who’s created the greatest economy in the history of our country," Trump told Reuters Tuesday evening, repeating a frequent claim based on strong economic indicators.

"I’m not concerned, no," he said. "I think that the people would revolt if that happened."..."​

Trump: 'People would revolt' if Democrats try to impeach me

 

I remember OKC like it was yesterday. My office was in DC but most of us traveled to "sections" which were groups of states. Individuals would generally be assigned certain Federal Districts within those sections. Usually, when on the road, you officed in the local USAO, which were usually inside the Federal Bldg. And, of course, over time you got to know everyone there. Not just the other attys but everyone working there, from the Marshalls to the janitors.

I was in DC when news of the OKC Federal Building hit. This was not my section but I was very close with many people who worked in that section (my golfing/Atlantic City buddies). I can remember getting up from my desk, going down one flight of stairs headed for a close friend who I knew who worked in that OKC building. i was not sure if she was there or in DC that day. I still can remember the sick feeling I had as I hit the stairwell.

Before I could get to her office, I could see alot of folks in shock in the hallways. Luckily Shannon was in her office that day. She was crying. I am not sure I have ever seen someone look so sad and hopeless. She was as delicate as a porcelain doll. That day was rough.

 

Now we need to see Trump work to cut spending. If he is true to his campaign statements about military intervention, he could even bargain with the Dems with some military cuts.

 

And now I present you -- yogapants with built-in gun holsters

 

Is this the new COS?

 

The answer is NO

 

The latest Atlanta Fed US GDPNow Q4 puts it at 3.0%

 

Chris Christie was tapped for the gig and said no. Who else is in the mix? Kushner? Hannity? Limbaugh?

 

Jared Kushner?

Trump's "toxicity" and looming legal troubles is making his CoS job the toughest job in America. The POTUS' erratic behavior makes it near impossible to be successful in the role.

 

What about Rudy or Newt?

 

Mick Mulvaney (OMB) is the new acting White House chief of staff.

 

Jose Canseco is making a pitch for the job. Link.

 

I was just thinking about this the other day. If this case makes it up to the Supremes on appeal, John Roberts has already trapped himself inside his own earlier reasoning -- that "it's a tax." Roberts' original opinion was the legal basis for this new opinion.
Plus, we now have the Kavanaugh.
IMO, Obamacare is done. It is now just a matter of time.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...politics--alert-national&wpmk=1&noredirect=on

And I am even willing to go even one step further. Now that we have a firm majority on the SCOTUS, we are going to see a complete unwinding of the entire unconstitutional framework that "progressive" judicial activism has wrought. The "Administrative State" and their fake administrative judges are now officially on notice. It will be slow, methodical and comprehensive. Separation of Powers will be restored. And if Trump gets that RBG seat, the Republic is saved.

This is what I kept telling y'all the 2016 election was really about. It will just take time to see it unfold. Is that too much optimism for you on a Saturday morning?

 

Obama's Legacy updated --

The Iran Deal is over
The Paris Climate Accord is over
Cap & Trade is over
Obamacare looks to be over

What does that leave?
FISA corruption is about it.

(maybe men in girls' bathrooms too?)

 

ACA going away would be good. Then there are about 10 other things that would have to happen so that healthcare cost could abate.

 

My 22 year old son is on my employers coverage. The ACA covers him until he is 26. What will happen? The portability of pre-existing conditions is also a huge plus for humans in America. What is the gain for our country in the absence of these two provisions of the law? It's no joke. The inability to cover my son on my employers plan (very inexpensive) would be a huge blow to our family. What coverage is available for him? He's in college now. Does he have to drop out and get whatever job just to have coverage? Do I have to find insurance somewhere and pay whatever so he can complete his studies?

 

That is part of the 10 other things I am talking about. Linking insurance to employment is a huge distortion. If everyone had to find their own insurance you wouldn't have the huge variance in premium between employer provided and individual. Goods and services typically reduce in price the longer they exist as a result of competition and efficiencies. You also could have had other kinds of set ups arise, like long term family plans which would allow college students to stay on their parents plans. Things like that would arise because there is a real market desire for those types of things.

However, they can't exist in our current system because your employer doesn't want to pay for your children's insurance any longer than they have to. The current system actually favors the employers and insurance companies over the healthcare consumers.

A single payer would be even worse as the real customer to the healthcare provider would be government agencies and cronies. That means the center of gravity would be that much further away from the healthcare consumer.

Then you would need to undo or redo the medical school licensure process or requirements so that the supply of doctors would be determined by demand for them. Today, the number of doctors is restricted to maintain high income levels. Of course there are also huge costs added to them which makes it hard to have a profitable practice.

Healthcare is a mess because the government and large associations have been writing the rules together for about a 100 years.

 

@Monahorns

All that sounds well-informed and logical; but it's only theory. What happens if SCOTUS upholds this judge's ruling? The void will become reality. It almost sounds like the 9th Court in California everyone is complaining about. Since Congress won't act, a judge does. The idea of a repeal by a court ruling puts it on Congress and in this climate I can't see them forging any agreement to replace ACA. It will languish. It's as if someone very powerful wants to go back to the days prior to even when we had at least some portability (HIPPA?) if we maintained uninterrupted coverage (interrupted for no more than 59 days ).

 

I don't think I follow you. Are you saying that now your employer will not cover your son at 22? Or are you saying that they won't cover past 26?