I'm not sure what you are saying was inaccurate. I said Obama had low GDP growth, which is plainly accurate, and then you come back talking about national debt. But if you want to talk about that, then fine. Your article stated, "Under President Obama, the national debt grew the most dollar-wise. He added $8.588 trillion. This 74 percent increase was the fifth-largest."

So it just depends on how you look at it. But to be clear, I would criticize Reagan for his debt accumulation as well as Bush II and, for now, Trump.

You see, that's how you and I are different. You will not break out of your protective shell to be critical of Obama under any circumstances. His 8 years was filled with scandal and lying, but you never mention it. Criticize Trump all you want, but at least apply the same standard to your beloved President Obama.

For the 78th time, it's all about politics.

Maybe Obama handled his so called "scandals" a lot better than yo' boy dufus and that says a lot in of itself.

Tell me Tal, what did that Muslim B'tard do for your country, other than stuffing it with debt?

Well according to you he was appointed by God. You dare question YOUR God?

It's even worse than I thought. Now you are praising Obama for being clever at hiding his scandals. What praise!

Fact is 0 indictments of Obama's peeps, 6 in two years for the dufus. Do the math anyway you can.

And zero indicted for crimes committed while employed in the Trump administration. So that would be... zero.

Flynn was the NSA advisor for a few weeks.

On that basis he was inflicted upon you

OK. I stand corrected. It is ONE. ONE. A great big ONE. Whoopee.

Judge rules Epstein deal unconstitutional.

Really aSuch hyperbole used to refer to despicable acts

How about both descriptors? Either way another example of money TRUMPING justice. Epstein is no better than Cosby, or R Kelley is he?

Thank goodness he didn't do something genuinely despicable like holding a private meeting with the husband of a woman under active FBI investigation, and then just days later deciding not to file charges against the woman who, rather conveniently, just happened to be the democrat nominee for president.

That was a despicable post! How do you conflate child molesting and sexual abuse when you have NO EVIDENCE of the conversation between an ex prez, and an AG? Looks bad but come on man!

:(

1. You linked to an NPR report, which is a notoriously left wing news organization. I'd love to hear what Acosta has to say before drawing any conclusions.
2. No evidence other than AG Lynch admitted the meeting took place?? Are you serious when you say "no evidence"?
3. If Epstein is indeed guilty, and it sure seems he is, then he should be hammered. If Acosta was playing politics with the plea deal, then he should be hammered. And if Lynch met with Clinton in secret (and she did), then she should have been dismissed the next day, but Obama would not deal with wrong-doing in his administration.
4. Sorry. My post was not despicable. Calm down. I'm still waiting for you to show any disgust at all with what Lynch did, but I know you won't since that would involve being critical of an Obama appointee and I know you won't go there.

Lynch recused herself from the case to avoid just what you are talking about. You guys make everything a deep state conspiracy, but don't want to see what the dufus is lying about. Unbelievable.

When the right-wing loonies equate child abuse with the AG meeting, you know it's time to spend time fruitfully elsewhere. After not reading it for a few weeks, I come back and see it's starting to look like something out of Alex Jones' InfoWars. The loonies are getting loonier and loonier.

Another tip-off is criticism of Trump is invariably met with something negative about Hillary or Obama, rarely challenging the criticism of Trump. And when Trump's lies are equated to Obama's "lies", one can only shake one's head.

You say "unbelievable" - so true!

I have no problem with criticisms of Trump and have said so repeatedly. What I don't care for is the continual "holier than thou" attitude of the liberals who love to criticize Trump but are so in love with Obama and Clinton that there was never a critical word spoken about them. It's also amusing to see that all the name calling on this board is coming from the people who are supposedly against hate speech. Might want to take a look at yourself before you start looking at the "right-wing loonies".

If you can't see the despicable nature of Obama's lies about Benghazi, then you are too deeply into his politics.

As for Lynch recusing herself after her completely unethical meeting with Clinton, it's a case of closing the gate after the horse has gotten out of the barn. If you think they spent 45 minutes talking about the grandchildren, then you need a larger dose of reality.

Most of us liberals have moved beyond the Obama/Clinton stuff and focused on the NOW. You don't seem to have and keep rehashing the old stuff. I suppose there is a case for that, but you really should separate the past and deal with the present. I'm sre you enjoyed blasting the dems and liberals, so why shouldn't we have fun blasting the repubs and conservatives?

No I don't like the dufus or his policies, words, behavior, or the conservatives and repubs who can ignore his behavior. That's what I express. I live in the reality of NOW, but I did see this day coming as the pendulum swung back to you guys, and what you do. No biggie.