B of A says October 2022 Market Will Bottom

abby97

HR All-American
Sep 16, 2010
4,243
3,790
113
With interest rates going up, you'd expect a bunch of investors to find better places to park their money than the stock market, wouldn't you?

Doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the health of the economy or companies.
Do you believe higher interest rates arrived in a bubble? The reason the Fed raised the rates was due to inflation at record highs and showing no sign of retreat. The labor participation rate is also terrible not to mention fuel prices and we still have supply chain issues. The economy is a wreck. The way to start to get the country out of this cycle would be to stop spending and make it easier for oil and gas producers to get more supply on the market. Unfortunately those two things are an anathema to this administration.
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,019
19,378
113
If the war depended only on Dem votes would it have happened?
Since democrats controlled the Senate, and Biden conducted pro-war hearings in the intel committee, I’d say they were decisive.

Recall, Bush went to war only with Congressional authorization. The neocons wanted to continue what Clinton had done (and Obama resumed), waging war against nations while never receiving congressional approval. There was, rightfully, pushback and the administration then requested and received the 2003 AUMF.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
43,267
75,414
113
I haven't seen a lot of celebration but I would like to see someone in the WH take some ownership and not blame everyone under the sun.
donald-trump-responsibility.gif
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
43,267
75,414
113
GOP admin got us 3 vaccines in 9 months that were available to the most vulnerable in mass numbers. That’s really all they needed to do. Saying they mishandled it is pure partisan insanity. Please pull head out of rear end ASAP.
I agreed with your post up to the last paragraph.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
43,267
75,414
113
You don’t like vaccines? Interesting. Didn’t take you as an antivaxer.
Lol. I'm fully vaccinated.

My point of contention is with what exactly you think the Trump administration did to expedite the vaccine. I would also disagree with the premise Donald Trump handled everything appropriately, as he offered the public a lot of mixed messaging throughout the pandemic response in addition to uttering absolutely absurd drivel, like it magically disappearing with warmer weather.

In terms of actual policies, I agree with you. The Democratic response wouldn't have been much different. However, in times of crises, leadership matters, and Donald Trump proved time and time again just how self-absorbed and demented he really is. And with the cult of Trump lapping up every inane utterance out of his mouth, there's no way to know for sure how mitigation efforts not being taken seriously would or would not have changed the outcome of the pandemic in the United States
 

NCHawk5

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 7, 2019
9,727
6,948
113
Lol. I'm fully vaccinated.

My point of contention is with what exactly you think the Trump administration did to expedite the vaccine. I would also disagree with the premise Donald Trump handled everything appropriately, as he offered the public a lot of mixed messaging throughout the pandemic response in addition to uttering absolutely absurd drivel, like it magically disappearing with warmer weather.

In terms of actual policies, I agree with you. The Democratic response wouldn't have been much different. However, in times of crises, leadership matters, and Donald Trump proved time and time again just how self-absorbed and demented he really is. And with the cult of Trump lapping up every inane utterance out of his mouth, there's no way to know for sure how mitigation efforts not being taken seriously would or would not have changed the outcome of the pandemic in the United States

Maybe this will provide you some insight. He promoted shutting the country down, then backed off when it didn’t accomplish anything. Had mobile hospitals ready to go and we never needed them. I prefer looking at actual policy rather than whatever nonsense comes out of a politician’s mouth.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
43,267
75,414
113
His energy polices have driven a lot of it as it touches all aspects of the economy. On top of that, continuing COVID era unemployment as we were way past the need was a huge mistake.
Biden allowed COVID unemployment benefits to expire last September.


Should they have been extended the year before? Probably not. But I'm not seeing the connection to this conversation.

In terms of oil prices, as has been discussed numerous times, closing the Keystone pipeline doesn't affect short-term prices. There are also numerous other factors that affect oil prices beyond the president's control, which started happening under Trump, btw. While it's true banning Russian oil has caused the recent spike in prices, it can be debated that doing so was the right thing given Putin's aggression toward Ukraine.

Here is what I believe to be a fair and objective op-ed on the issue of rising oil prices from Forbes.

 

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
Funny how memory (doesn't) work:

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." "
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators. "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."
-- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D. CA) Oct. 10, 2002


It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
Bush and Cheney should have let the weapons inspectors finish their jobs before pressing the attack. But, that would have forced them to find another reason to reach their ultimate goal, which was regime change all along.
 

BlackNGoldBleeder

HR Legend
Jun 23, 2017
43,267
75,414
113

Maybe this will provide you some insight. He promoted shutting the country down, then backed off when it didn’t accomplish anything. Had mobile hospitals ready to go and we never needed them. I prefer looking at actual policy rather than whatever nonsense comes out of a politician’s mouth.
And as I've said numerous times I don't find fault with any of the actual policies implemented in response to COVID by the Trump administration. I also don't fault Trump for shutting down the country at the time given how little we knew about COVID then. It was the right and responsible thing to do, even if it proved in hindsight to have been done in error.

My point about the vaccines is the scientists get the credit for putting out an effective vaccine in such a short amount of time. I'm thoroughly convinced the roll out process would have occurred as it did regardless of whether Hillary or Trump had been president. So, this whole idea that it was the genius of the Trump administration that got us the vaccine in months is laughable. In terms of Biden's claims about the lack of coherence in the Trump plan, that is really no different than Trump claiming at the start of the pandemic that Obama left them with nothing in the PPE reserve. False and stupid.

Last, it should matter to you "whatever nonsense comes out of a politician's mouth." If you don't understand why that's important, then you don't understand the value of leadership.
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,019
19,378
113
Bush and Cheney should have let the weapons inspectors finish their jobs before pressing the attack. But, that would have forced them to find another reason to reach their ultimate goal, which was regime change all along.
Memories are truly terrible:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy stating that "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq." It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. The Act was cited in October 2002 to argue for the authorization of military force against Iraq.
 

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
Memories are truly terrible:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy stating that "It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq." It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, and states that it is the policy of the United States to support democratic movements within Iraq. The Act was cited in October 2002 to argue for the authorization of military force against Iraq.
LOL. What a reach.

Why didn't they do it when they first took office then? Probably would have avoided 9/11 all together then!

Another Bush Administration failure then.

JC
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,019
19,378
113
LOL. What a reach.
Why didn't they do it when they first took office then? Probably would have avoided 9/11 all together then!
LOL. What a reach.
Explain why you think invading Iraq when Bush took office ‘would have avoided 9/11 all together’.
 

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
LOL. What a reach.
Explain why you think invading Iraq when Bush took office ‘would have avoided 9/11 all together’.
Well, was it not a general consensus in the Bush administration that Saddam was tied to 9/11, and they were telling the American people that that's why we had to attack Iraq?
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,019
19,378
113
Well, was it not a general consensus in the Bush administration that Saddam was tied to 9/11, and they were telling the American people that that's why we had to attack Iraq?
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
 

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
You're deflecting away from the Bush administration for some reason? I wonder why?

I also wonder where these 2 people got their cherry picked info from, the Bush administration again?

lol

By the way, where the al Qaeda refuge area in Iraq was, was in a no-fly zone where Saddam had little if any control, or our air forces would have smoked his arse had Saddam attempted anything.

Also, Bush chased the weapons inspectors out of Iraq shortly before he went to war. Wonder why he would do that since the weapons inspectors weren't finding any viable weapons systems? Hmmm. Maybe he had another agenda?
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,019
19,378
113
You're deflecting away from the Bush administration for some reason? I wonder why?
If you think that, you misperceive.
Im simply pointing out that the Iraq war had bipartisan support, with all the Democratic luminaries making the claim that Iraq had WMD and was a threat to the U.S.
A Big Lie was born after 2003 that the Democrats had nothing to do with it, and it was all Bush and the neocons.
When I confront the people who swallow that lie with these quotes they either leave the thread, or try to deflect from them without acknowledging the Democrats made all these same arguments.

What will you do?
 

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
If you think that, you misperceive.
Im simply pointing out that the Iraq war had bipartisan support, with all the Democratic luminaries making the claim that Iraq had WMD and was a threat to the U.S.
A Big Lie was born after 2003 that the Democrats had nothing to do with it, and it was all Bush and the neocons.
When I confront the people who swallow that lie with these quotes they either leave the thread, or try to deflect from them without acknowledging the Democrats made all these same arguments.

What will you do?
Like I said, where did people get their info to make their decisions to support the war? It was largely from cherry picked raw intelligence that had not been vetted properly by the Bush people involved in the government at that time. They wanted war and rigged the intelligence to support it.

Are there hawks on both side of the aisle? Of course, there are, but again a valid intelligence assessment probably would have given pause to some.
 

seminole97

HR Legend
Jun 14, 2005
19,019
19,378
113
Like I said, where did people get their info to make their decisions to support the war? It was largely from cherry picked raw intelligence that had not been vetted properly by the Bush people involved in the government at that time. They wanted war and rigged the intelligence to support it.
Why am I not surprised by this deflection?

Where did Dick Gephardt get his information?


I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
 
Last edited:

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
On February 5, 2003, as the United States was preparing to invade Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell made a pivotal presentation to the United Nations Security Council claiming Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

The biological weapon anthrax could be delivered against Iraq’s neighbours or the US by unmanned aerial vehicles, Powell claimed, dramatically holding up a small glass vial as proof.

“Saddam Hussein and his regime will stop a nothing until something stops him,” Powell told the UN Security Council, arguing that Iraq was deceiving UN weapons inspectors.

Powell’s presentation was forceful, seemingly exhaustive and had the effect of cinching the US case for preemptive war against Iraq before the international community.

“What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence,” Powell told the Security Council.

But it was not true. The underlying intelligence was false. For Powell, who died at age 84 on October 18 from complications of COVID-19, it proved to be an enduring stain on his record.

Powell, who was secretary of state from 2002 to 2005, gave an elaborate description of Iraq’s weapons programme and sought to tie Hussein to al-Qaeda in “ambition and hatred”.

“This was a typical American show, complete with stunts and special effects,” Iraq Lieutenant General Amir al-Saadi, who had overseen Hussein’s weapons programme, said of Powell’s presentation at the time.

History has proven al-Saadi correct; Iraq had destroyed its special weapons in compliance with UN mandates.

Before the US invasion, no weapons of mass destruction had been found in more than 70 UN site inspections. And none was found after by the US military.

Powell was defensive at first, denying to Congress in 2004 that US intelligence had been twisted to justify the US invasion.

“Truth is the first casualty of war. I would contend that the truth was murdered before a shot was fired,” Representative Gary Ackerman, a Democrat, told Powell in a contentious hearing.

Powell snapped back, “The truth was not murdered, Mr Ackerman. Nobody shaped it, nobody told the intelligence community what to say.”

Years later, confronted with the facts, Powell was forced to acknowledge that his UN presentation, painstakingly prepared across several days by the CIA, was wrong.

“It turned out, as we discovered later, that a lot of sources that had been attested to by the intelligence community were wrong,” Powell told Al Jazeera in 2011 interview.

As became clear, questionable US intelligence reports had been cherry-picked and elevated to support President George W Bush’s propaganda drive to convince Americans that war against Iraq was necessary. Powell’s UN speech was pivotal in swaying US public opinion.

“It has blotted my record, but you know, there’s nothing I can do to change that blot. All I can say is that I gave it the best analysis that I could,” Powell told Al Jazeera.

In the weeks and months that followed the US invasion on March 19, 2003, US forces struggled to find evidence of WMD.

“I was more than embarrassed. I was mortified,” Powell said in a 2017 interview on Bloomberg, admitting his presentation had been pivotal.

“I’m the one who made the biggest presentation of it, and so it all sort of fell on me,” said Powell who repeatedly blamed the US intelligence agencies for producing bad information.

“There wasn’t a word in that speech, that presentation that was not vetted and approved by the intelligence community,” Powell told CNN interviewer Larry King in 2010.

In fact, Powell had been apprehensive about the US intelligence on Iraq and he confided to the British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw at the time that he feared the doubtful claims would “explode in their faces”, according to reports of Straw and Powell’s conversation.

The bad intelligence was produced by political appointees working for then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney.

I Lewis “Scooter” Libby, a top aide to Cheney, and Douglas Feith, who headed Rumsfeld’s Office of Special Plans, produced a series of bogus claims including that Iraq had bought a uranium source from Niger and that there were links between al-Qaeda and Hussein’s government.

The two worked to incorporate the information into talking points and presentations and they targeted doubters like Powell inside the administration and critics outside.

Libby was later convicted for publicising the identity of CIA agent Valerie Plame in retaliation against her husband Ambassador Joe Wilson, who had publicly challenged Bush’s arguments.

A former US ambassador to Niger, Wilson had investigated the Niger uranium claims at the request of the CIA in 2002 and reported back that they were false.

George W Bush commuted Libby’s 30-month prison sentence for revealing Plame as a secret agent but did not pardon him, leaving in place his felony conviction.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/18/stain-on-powells-record-lies-to-the-un-about-iraqs-weapons


Colin Powell talked about his UN speech years later:

You have to remember that at the time I gave the speech on Feb. 5, (2003) the president had already made this decision for military action. The dice had been tossed. That’s what we were going to do. The Congress had passed a resolution three months before that speech that essentially gave the president the authorization to do it. Overwhelmingly they voted for it, and it was on the basis of that National Intelligence Estimate. The president had been using these very significant points about biological vans and chemical weapons in his speeches and in the State of the Union address. There was really nothing in my speech that hadn’t already been covered in the State of the Union or other speeches.

The reason I went to the U.N. is because we needed now to put the case before the entire international community in a powerful way, and that’s what I did that day.

Of course walking into that room is always a daunting experience, but I had been there before. And we had projectors and all sorts of technology to help us make the case. And that’s what I did. I made the case with the director of central intelligence sitting behind me. He and his team had vouched for everything in it. We didn’t make up anything. We threw out a lot of stuff that was not double- and triple-sourced, because I knew the importance of this.

When I was through, I felt pretty good about it. I thought we had made the case, and there was pretty good reaction to it for a few weeks. And then suddenly, the CIA started to let us know that the case was falling apart — parts of the case were falling apart. It was deeply disturbing to me and to the president, to all of us, and to the Congress, because they had voted on the basis of that information. And 16 intelligence agencies had agreed to it, with footnotes. None of the footnotes took away their agreement.

So it was deeply troubling, and I think that it was a great intelligence failure on our part, because the problems that existed in that NIE should have been recognized and caught earlier by the intelligence community.


This article is a very good read. Rather long, but very informative. Powell talks about even bigger failures after the invasion had already taken Baghdad.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/colin-powell-u-n-speech-was-a-great-intelligence-failure/
 

TheCainer

HR Legend
Sep 23, 2003
24,129
18,309
113
Why am I not surprised by this deflection?

Where did Dick Gephardt get his information?


I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
Just in case you haven't read it, I responded just above as to where Dick Gephardt got his intelligence, and how flawed it was. Colin Powell realized that shortly after his address at the UN in the build up shortly before we went to war in Iraq. You might want to read the 2 articles I linked to if you still have any doubts.