Originally Posted by havax

BREAKING: Obama DOJ Allegedly Threatened FBI Informant To Silence Him On Russian Nuclear Corruption | Daily Wire

This does not surprise me at all.

[.....]
Toensing wants the Trump Justice Department or the FBI to allow her client to be free of the nondisclosure agreement (NDA) he signed so he can reveal the corruption that took place. She stated, ***8220;All of the information about this corruption has not come out. And so my client, the same part of my client that made him go into the FBI in the first place, says, 'This is wrong. What should I do about it?'***8221;
[.....]
Toensing claimed her client witnessed ***8220;a lot of bribery going on around the U.S.***8221; but the FBI had requested he sign an NDA so he could not come forth to Congress.

The Hill possesses emails in which a civil attorney working with the former undercover witness wrote to him, ***8220;The government was taking a very harsh position that threatened both your reputation and liberty,***8221; as well as, ***8220;As you will recall the gov***8217;t made serious threats sufficient to cause you to withdraw your civil complaint."
[.....]

Just another day working for the Federal Government. And we have people on this board who believe they should be responsible for our health care.

Read something the other day about a bunch of investors that are getting really nervous about big-pharma overcharging the government [back room deals] and the people, to the point where many of them believe it can **** with our government induced, fragile economy.

u read that on infowars?

nah, the hill

Maybe we can get the pizzagate guys 2 solve this Russia saga, we can finally put Hillary behind bars

Originally Posted by phaytal

Are there any news outlets that aren't fake news havax? Besides Pickles of course.

Pickles from The Truth Factory is punditry and conjecture not News.

Trump broke her

Chelsea Handler on Twitter:

Originally Posted by cael

u read that on infowars?

Business Insider: Wall Street found a parasite growing in the US economy that could spur the next recession. Where the heroes are the left, the villains are on the right.

Originally Posted by Gouge

Pickles from The Truth Factory is punditry and conjecture not News.

Then shouldn't it be called 'Shot In The Dark Factory'?

Originally Posted by Dangerdoggie

Trump broke her

Chelsea Handler on Twitter:

This **** should take a cue from Megyn Kelly.

She'll be ground up and throw in the cry towel within a year.

After a rocky two seasons, comedian Chelsea Handler has announced that she will end her Netflix talk show, ***8220;Chelsea,***8221; after two seasons. She will reportedly focus on political activism.

Chelsea Handler's Netflix talk show to end after Season 2 so she can focus on activism

yay, that's all we need, more celebrities going around virtue signaling and telling us how much more they know about politics than us and what we as a society need

Originally Posted by phaytal

Then shouldn't it be called 'Shot In The Dark Factory'?

Should DAHBOO77 be called DAHBOO77 News?

Why care what people name there YouTube channels.

I had no idea who this Chelsea is even is.

Highly doubt she left to do leftist virtue signaling. More than likely her show was so low that Netflix dropped it. She probably got together with other social justice nuts in Netflix (i hear its ****ing loaded with SJW's) and pitched a show where she goes and interviews POC, Muslims, LGTBWTFBBQ and others dregs of society.

Perhaps The Bull**** Factory.

Originally Posted by phaytal

Perhaps The Bull**** Factory.

Sounds like a good name for your channel.

Originally Posted by samUwell

I had no idea who this Chelsea is even is.

Highly doubt she left to do leftist virtue signaling. More than likely her show was so low that Netflix dropped it. She probably got together with other social justice nuts in Netflix (i hear its ****ing loaded with SJW's) and pitched a show where she goes and interviews POC, Muslims, LGTBWTFBBQ and others dregs of society.

You nailed it bro!

***** pulled the parachute before they cut her cord.

Although Handler’s Netflix talk show was not necessarily as popular as she or the streaming service hoped it would be, it seems that she’s deciding to step away from the show rather than an outright cancellation by the steaming giant.

Originally Posted by Gouge

You nailed it bro!

***** pulled the parachute before they cut her cord.

Nice find. Lol

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Simple formula:

1) Work hard
2) Follow the rules (mostly)
3) STFU
4) Be polite
5) Avoid everyone
6) Love family
7) Help a brother out when you are able
8) Want change? Go into politics and help people.
9) Quit thinking you are special
10) Mostly STFU

Originally Posted by Chaol

1. Trickle-down is an opinion on how to fuel economic growth trickling down via increased investment. It would be market-driven, not redistributive. Many feel that trickle-down is a theoretically ungrounded effort to implement regressive taxation, a fig-leaf cover for funneling wealth towards the wealthy.

2. gov debt is only relevant to trickle-down in that it has been used to fund the upward redistribution (see Bush tax cuts)

3. See #1

4. You don't make a coherent point here, but it's clear you misunderstand the velocity of money. In a vacuum increased taxation will slow the velocity (& consequently growth). Trickle-down taxation instead describes how tax receipts are distributed from the various income levels. To increase the velocity of money (& growth), you want more money in the hands of people who will spend it, not invest it. There are many reasons why we have had only decent growth recently. I am of the opinion that one of those is that we've instituted trickle-down and it has predictably gummed up the economy.

5. Wrong. Here's a similar growth in cash accumulation among EU corporations, who are not subject to repatriation taxes:


6. OK re-word it as "As described by its proponents". What little theoretical support there is for trickle-down comes from Arthur Laffer's "curve". Both theory and experience are unkind to Laffer's Curve, particularly as it has been implemented in the US.

Originally Posted by Chaol

1. Trickle-down is an opinion on how to fuel economic growth trickling down via increased investment. It would be market-driven, not redistributive. Many feel that trickle-down is a theoretically ungrounded effort to implement regressive taxation, a fig-leaf cover for funneling wealth towards the wealthy.

2. gov debt is only relevant to trickle-down in that it has been used to fund the upward redistribution (see Bush tax cuts)

3. See #1

4. You don't make a coherent point here, but it's clear you misunderstand the velocity of money. In a vacuum increased taxation will slow the velocity (& consequently growth). Trickle-down taxation instead describes how tax receipts are distributed from the various income levels. To increase the velocity of money (& growth), you want more money in the hands of people who will spend it, not invest it. There are many reasons why we have had only decent growth recently. I am of the opinion that one of those is that we've instituted trickle-down and it has predictably gummed up the economy.

5. Wrong. Here's a similar growth in cash accumulation among EU corporations, who are not subject to repatriation taxes:


6. OK re-word it as "As described by its proponents". What little theoretical support there is for trickle-down comes from Arthur Laffer's "curve". Both theory and experience are unkind to Laffer's Curve, particularly as it has been implemented in the US.

Originally Posted by Chaol

1. Trickle-down is an opinion on how to fuel economic growth trickling down via increased investment. It would be market-driven, not redistributive. Many feel that trickle-down is a theoretically ungrounded effort to implement regressive taxation, a fig-leaf cover for funneling wealth towards the wealthy.

2. gov debt is only relevant to trickle-down in that it has been used to fund the upward redistribution (see Bush tax cuts)

3. See #1

4. You don't make a coherent point here, but it's clear you misunderstand the velocity of money. In a vacuum increased taxation will slow the velocity (& consequently growth). Trickle-down taxation instead describes how tax receipts are distributed from the various income levels. To increase the velocity of money (& growth), you want more money in the hands of people who will spend it, not invest it. There are many reasons why we have had only decent growth recently. I am of the opinion that one of those is that we've instituted trickle-down and it has predictably gummed up the economy.

5. Wrong. Here's a similar growth in cash accumulation among EU corporations, who are not subject to repatriation taxes:


6. OK re-word it as "As described by its proponents". What little theoretical support there is for trickle-down comes from Arthur Laffer's "curve". Both theory and experience are unkind to Laffer's Curve, particularly as it has been implemented in the US.

Originally Posted by Chaol

1. Trickle-down is an opinion on how to fuel economic growth trickling down via increased investment. It would be market-driven, not redistributive. Many feel that trickle-down is a theoretically ungrounded effort to implement regressive taxation, a fig-leaf cover for funneling wealth towards the wealthy.

2. gov debt is only relevant to trickle-down in that it has been used to fund the upward redistribution (see Bush tax cuts)

3. See #1

4. You don't make a coherent point here, but it's clear you misunderstand the velocity of money. In a vacuum increased taxation will slow the velocity (& consequently growth). Trickle-down taxation instead describes how tax receipts are distributed from the various income levels. To increase the velocity of money (& growth), you want more money in the hands of people who will spend it, not invest it. There are many reasons why we have had only decent growth recently. I am of the opinion that one of those is that we've instituted trickle-down and it has predictably gummed up the economy.

5. Wrong. Here's a similar growth in cash accumulation among EU corporations, who are not subject to repatriation taxes:


6. OK re-word it as "As described by its proponents". What little theoretical support there is for trickle-down comes from Arthur Laffer's "curve". Both theory and experience are unkind to Laffer's Curve, particularly as it has been implemented in the US.

hello pls respond