Summary

President Joe Biden highlighted his administration’s economic record, citing consistent job growth and a 2.7% inflation rate drop from its 2022 peak.

December’s jobs report showed 256,000 new jobs and declining unemployment, signaling steady economic growth.

However, inflation remains above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target, and interest rates remain high, impacting homebuyers and businesses.

Public pessimism lingers on affordability as Biden passes a largely strong economy to his successor, Donald Trump.

  • ubergeek
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    Garland pretended to build a case, with zero intention of every trying to prosecute it.

    Remember, Garland is a neocon too. He only got put up for SCOTUS because Obama was trying to make a point (That the GOP will never let him appoint a justice).

    Biden acted like that never happened.

    • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 days ago

      Garland pretended to build a case, with zero intention of every trying to prosecute it.

      Where’s your proof that he only pretended to build a case?

      There isn’t any. It’s a conspiracy theory.

      • SoftTeeth@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The fact that he didn’t put Trump in prison for the crimes he was convicted of is the issue.

        It doesn’t matter how he avoided it, he did because that’s what his rich masters wanted

        • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Garland can’t just lock up the president of the US without due process.

          Trump blocked that due process and has sworn revenge on people like Garland.

          Now you’re trying to blame Garland for Trumps actions But why? To manufacture consent for Trumps revenge? To vilify Trumps enemies?

      • ubergeek
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Proof?

        Did Garland ever lay charges for sedition? The evidence was right on TV for the entire global population to watch live…

          • ubergeek
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            Proof of what? That Trump led an insurrection, and Garland did nothing about it, except talking about some day doing something about it?

            • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Garland started multiple investigations. And did all the things necessary to prosecute a President. Trump delayed that prosecution using his judges.

              Then you claim Garland didn’t start the investigations or try to prosecute Trump. And you blame Trumps enemies for Trumps actions.

              • ubergeek
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                How long does one need for something that was publicly broadcast?

                • UsernameHere@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  What exactly are you referring to that was publically broadcasted?

                  Because the argument that Trump used was that he didn’t incite the insurrection and that the people who stormed the capital acted on their own.

                  So to prosecute Trump, the DOJ had to prove beyond doubt that Trump intentionally incited the insurrection.

                  Not prove it to you or me. But prove it to a Judge appointed by Trump.

                  While managing the thousands of cases and investigations against the insurrectionists.

                  Proving intent beyond a doubt to a Trump appointed judge would require hard evidence and could still be ruled in favor of Trump by the judge he appointed.

                  • ubergeek
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    What exactly are you referring to that was publically broadcasted?

                    The literal insurrection that happened, at his prompting…

                    Because the argument that Trump used was that he didn’t incite the insurrection and that the people who stormed the capital acted on their own.

                    Almost all of the folks convicted stated otherwise.

                    So to prosecute Trump, the DOJ had to prove beyond doubt that Trump intentionally incited the insurrection.

                    Doesn’t sound any more difficult than a nationwide manhunt for someone who defended our nation against a mass murderer… And they seemed to be able to get that wrapped up pretty quickly.

                    Not prove it to you or me. But prove it to a Judge appointed by Trump.

                    I would have loved, had they tried. Garland, however, did not want to launch a case against a fellow neocon.

                    While managing the thousands of cases and investigations against the insurrectionists

                    It must suck to be the AG… Or, perhaps, Biden should have appointed someone up tot he task. Meanwhile, they were investigating thousands of insurrectionists, convicted a bunch, who all stated they were following Trump’s orders.|

                    Proving intent beyond a doubt to a Trump appointed judge would require hard evidence and could still be ruled in favor of Trump by the judge he appointed.

                    Yes, I would have LOVED to see him even try to do so… However, he did not want to sic the hounds on a neocon darling like Trump.