President Trump

The Pronk Pops Show 1399, February 14, 2020, Story 1: Department of Justice Will Not Prosecute Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe — When are U.S. Attorney John Durham Indictments Coming Down for Illegally Syping on Trump Campaign? — Summer or 12th of Never — Will Justice Be Done — Videos — Story 2: Department of Justice Unseals 16-Count Indictment Against Huawei To Steal Trade Secrets of Six U.S. Companies — Videos — Story 3: Just Walk Away From Two Party Tyranny Big Government Parties — Walk Away Renee — Videos

Posted on February 16, 2020. Filed under: 2020 President Candidates, Addiction, Addiction, American History, Applications, Banking System, Blogroll, Breaking News, Bribery, Bribes, Budgetary Policy, Business, Cartoons, Central Intelligence Agency, Clinton Obama Democrat Criminal Conspiracy, Communications, Computers, Congress, Consitutional Law, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Deep State, Defense Spending, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Economics, Elections, Empires, Employment, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Government, Fifth Amendment, First Amendment, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Fourth Amendment, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, Hardware, Health Care Insurance, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, History, House of Representatives, Human, Human Behavior, Illegal Immigration, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Independence, Investments, Iran Nuclear Weapons Deal, IRS, Labor Economics, Law, Legal Immigration, Life, Lying, Media, Medicare, Mental Illness, Michael Bloomber, Military Spending, Monetary Policy, News, Obama, People, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Pro Abortion, Pro Life, Progressives, Public Corruption, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Resources, Rule of Law, Scandals, Second Amendment, Security, Senate, Servers, Social Security, Software, Spying, Spying on American People, Subversion, Success, Surveillance/Spying, Tax Policy, Taxation, Taxes, Technology, Terror, Terrorism, Trade Policy, Treason, Trump Surveillance/Spying, Unemployment, United States Constitution, United States of America, United States Supreme Court, Videos, Violence, Wall Street Journal, War, Wealth, Welfare Spending | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 1399 February 14, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1398 February 13, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1397 February 12, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1396 February 11, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1395 February 10, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1394 February 7, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1393 February 6, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1392 February 5, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1391 February 4, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1390 February 3, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1389 January 31, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1388 January 30, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1387 January 29, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1386 January 28, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1385 January 27, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1384 January 24, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1383 January 23, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1382 January 22, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1381 January 21, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1380 January 17, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1379 January 16, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1378 January 15, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1377 January 14, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1376 January 13, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1375 December 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1374 December 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1373 December 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1372 December 10, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1371 December 9, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1370 December 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1369 December 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1368 December 4, 2019 

Pronk Pops Show 1367 December 3, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1366 December 2, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1365 November 22, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1364 November 21, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1363 November 20, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1362 November 19, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1361 November 18, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1360 November 15, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1359 November 14, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1358 November 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1357 November 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1356 November 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1355 November 8, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1354 November 7, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1353 November 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1352 November 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1351 November 4, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1350 November 1, 2019

See the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

 

Story 1: Department of Justice Will Not Prosecute Former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe — When are U.S. Attorney John Durham Indictments Coming Down for Illegally Syping on Trump Campaign? — Summer or 12th of Never — Will Justice Be Done — Videos

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

FBI Director Confirms to Ratcliffe that FBI Illegally Surveilled Trump Campaign Associate

Feb 10, 2020

Gohmert in Judiciary Hearing on FBI Oversight: “This is Serious”

Hannity: Democrats’ unequal standard of justice exposed

Trish Regan: Andrew McCabe walking free is ‘a total injustice’

Gaetz: An old FBI business card isn’t a ‘get out of jail free card’

Feb 14, 2020

Trump notably quiet on DOJ decision not to prosecute Andrew McCabe

Bannon: GOP has to subpoena John Brennan, Adam Schiff

Feb 8, 2020

DOJ Declines To Prosecute Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe | Andrea Mitchell | MSNBC

‘General Flynn was set up’: KT McFarland

IG report hearing part 4: Lindsey Graham questions Michael Horowitz

Dec 11, 2019

Cruz on spying: This wasn’t Jason Bourne, this was ‘Beavis and Butt-head’

Dec 11, 2019

Tom Fitton: Why is the DOJ Editing “302” Interviews They Had With General Flynn?

Sebastian Gorka Radio: Trust Bill Barr and John Durham. Matt Whitaker with Sebastian Gorka

Hans von Spakovsky: CIA Director Haspel is Obligated to Comply with the Durham Investigation

Spygate Indictments Coming, Says Former Intelligence Operative Tony Shaffer

Aug 10, 2019

Fitton: Ohr 302s show ‘disturbing’ desperation to oust Trump

Aug 9, 2019

Tucker Carlson – Trump’s Claims of Spying

May 13, 2019

Did the Obama administration spy on the Trump campaign?

May 22, 2018

FBI Trump campaign spying allegations: How much did Obama know?

May 21, 2018

Roger Stone reacts to reports FBI spied on Trump campaign

May 17, 2018

DiGenova: Comey, Clapper and Brennan will have to pay the ‘Barr bill’

May 14, 2019

Watch Barr double down on Trump spying claims in heated exchange

FBI chief: No evidence of spying on Trump campaign

Barr: ‘I think spying did occur’ on Trump campaign

Apr 10, 2019

Former US attorney: FBI officials will likely face charges

Feb 7, 2018

Should Obama be investigated over Trump wiretapping claims?

Mar 31, 2017

Former FBI agent says his privacy was violated by Justice Dept.

AG Barr appoints outside prosecutor to review Michael Flynn case

Should officials who started the Russia probe be worrying?

Russia origins probe now a criminal investigation

Former US attorney: FBI officials will likely face charges

Johnny Mathis – 12th of Never

Why Wasn’t Andrew McCabe Charged?

The proof that he willfully deceived investigators appears strong, but the Justice Department likely felt there were too many obstacles to convicting him.

The Justice Department announced Friday that it is closing its investigation of Andrew McCabe, the FBI’s former deputy director, over his false statements to investigators probing an unauthorized leak that McCabe had orchestrated. McCabe was fired in March 2018, shortly after a blistering Justice Department inspector general (IG) report concluded that he repeatedly and blatantly lied — or, as the Bureau lexicon puts it, “lacked candor” — when questioned, including under oath.

I emphasize Flynn’s intent because purported lack of intent is McCabe’s principal defense, too. Even McCabe himself, to say nothing of his lawyers and his apologists in the anti-Trump network of bureaucrats-turned-pundits, cannot deny that he made false statements to FBI agents and the IG. Rather, they argue that the 21-year senior law-enforcement official did not mean to lie, that he was too distracted by his high-level responsibilities to focus on anything as mundane as a leak — even though he seemed pretty damned focused on the leak while he was orchestrating it.

It will be a while before we learn the whole story of why the Justice Department walked away from the McCabe case, if we ever do. I have some supposition to offer on that score. First, however, it is worth revisiting the case against McCabe as outlined by the meticulous and highly regarded IG, Michael Horowitz. If you want to know why people are so angry, and why they are increasingly convinced that, for all President Trump’s “drain the swamp” rhetoric, a two-tiered justice system that rewards the well-connected is alive and well, consider the following.

In fact, the Bureau’s then-director, James Comey, had tried to keep the Clinton Foundation probe under wraps, refusing to confirm or deny its existence even to the House Judiciary Committee. Comey had been right to stay mum: Public revelation would have harmed the probe and thrust the FBI deeper into the politics of the then-imminent 2016 presidential election, in which Hillary Clinton was the Democratic candidate and her investigation by the Bureau was an explosive campaign issue.

Notwithstanding these concerns, according to Horowitz’s report, McCabe orchestrated the leak “to advance his personal interests” — to paint himself in a favorable light in comparison to Justice Department officials amid an internal dispute about the Clinton Foundation probe (specifically, about the Obama Justice Department’s pressure on the Bureau to drop it). As the IG put it: “McCabe’s disclosure was an attempt to make himself look good by making senior department leadership . . . look bad.”

McCabe’s account has been contradicted by Comey, a witness who is otherwise sympathetic to him and hostile to the Trump Justice Department, and whose actions — like his — are being examined in prosecutor John Durham’s probe of the Trump-Russia investigation. Comey’s testimony is directly at odds with McCabe’s version of events, and the IG painstakingly explained why the former director’s version was credible while his deputy’s was not. (Comey was, nevertheless, exceedingly complimentary of McCabe after the IG report was published.)

Page is regarded by McCabe backers as key to his defense. She reportedly told the grand jury that, because McCabe had authority to approve media disclosures, he had no motive to lie about the leak. That’s laughable. McCabe did serially mislead investigators, so plainly he had some reason for doing so. But even putting that aside, the IG’s conclusion was not that McCabe lacked authority to leak; it was that he lacked a public-interest justification for exercising that authority. He leaked for self-promotion purposes, and then he lied about it because it was humiliating to be caught putting his personal interests ahead of the Bureau’s investigative integrity. That said, Page’s account does illuminate a problem for prosecutors: It’s tough to win a case when your witnesses are spinning for the defendant. (Oh, and have you seen Page’s tweet toasting McCabe in the aftermath of the news that the DOJ had closed the investigation?)

McCabe’s Multiple False Statements

Barrett’s Journal article appeared on October 30, 2016. The very next day, McCabe deceived Comey about it, indicating that he had not authorized the leak and had no idea who its source was. In Comey’s telling, credited by the IG, McCabe “definitely” did not acknowledge that he had approved the leak.

Thereafter, the FBI’s Inspection Division (INSD) opened an investigation of the leak. On May 9, 2017, McCabe denied to two INSD investigators that he knew the source of the leak. This was not a fleeting conversation. McCabe was placed under oath, and the INSD agents provided him with a copy of Barrett’s article. He read it and initialed it to acknowledge that he had done so. He was questioned about it by the agents, who took contemporaneous notes. McCabe told the agents that he had “no idea where [the leaked information] came from” or “who the source was.”

On July 28, 2017, McCabe was interviewed by the IG’s office — under oath and recorded on tape. In that session, he preposterously claimed to be unaware that Page, his FBI counsel, was directed to speak to reporters around the time of the October 30 Journal report. McCabe added that he was out of town then, and thus unaware of what Page had been up to. In point of fact, McCabe had consulted closely with Page about the leak. A paper trail of their texts and phone contacts evinced his keen interest in Page’s communications with Barrett. Consequently, the IG concluded that McCabe’s denials were “demonstrably false.”

Clearly concerned about the hole he had dug for himself, McCabe called the IG’s office four days later, on August 1, 2017, to say that, shucks, come to think of it, he just might have kinda, sorta told Page to speak with Barrett after all. He might even have told her to coordinate with Mike Kortan, then the Bureau’s top media liaison, and follow-up with the Journal about some of its prior reporting.

As the IG observed, this “attempt to correct his prior false testimony” was the “appropriate” thing for McCabe to do. Alas, when he was given an opportunity to come in and explain himself, he compounded his misconduct by making more false statements while under oath: In an interview with investigators on November 29, 2017, McCabe purported to recall informing Comey that he, McCabe, had authorized the leak, and that Comey had responded that the leak was a good idea.

These were quite stunning recollections, given that the deputy director had previously disclaimed any knowledge about the source of the leak. But McCabe took care of that little hiccup by simply denying his prior denial. That is, he insisted that he had not feigned ignorance about the leak when INSD interviewed him on May 9. Indeed, McCabe even denied that the May 9 interview had been a real interview. To the contrary, he claimed that agents had casually pulled him aside at the conclusion of a meeting on an unrelated topic, and peppered him out of the blue with a question or two about the Journal leak. As General Flynn could tell you, that sort of thing can be tough on a busy top U.S. government official . . . although Flynn did not get much sympathy for it when McCabe was running the FBI.

Again, the IG concluded that McCabe’s version of events was “demonstrably false.”

McCabe Covers His Tracks

As an old trial lawyer, I’d be remiss if I failed to rehearse my favorite part of the IG’s report — the part that would tell a jury everything they needed to know about good ol’ Andy McCabe.

Again, the Journal story generated by McCabe’s leak was published on October 30, a Sunday. Late that afternoon, McCabe called the head of the FBI’s Manhattan office. Why? Well . . . to ream him out over media leaks, that’s why. McCabe railed that New York agents must be the culprits. He also made a similar call to the Bureau’s Washington field office, warning its chief to “get his house in order” and stop these terribly damaging leaks.

It is worth remembering McCabe’s October 30 scolding of subordinates when you think about how he later claimed that, on the very next day, he’d freely admitted to his superior, Comey, that he himself was the source of the leak. Quite the piece of work, this guy: To throw the scent off himself after carefully arranging the leak, McCabe dressed down the FBI’s two premier field offices, knowing they were completely innocent, and then pretended for months that he knew nothing about the leak.

This is the second-highest-ranking officer of the nation’s top law-enforcement agency we’re talking about, here.

The Non-Prosecution Decision

We may never get a satisfying explanation for the Justice Department’s decision to drop the McCabe probe. That’s the way it is when such complicated reasons and motives are at play.

The aforementioned challenge of hostile witnesses is not to be underestimated. In addition, there are growing indications that the Justice Department had lost confidence in the U.S. attorney who was overseeing the probe, Jesse Liu. As I noted this week, while Liu was once seen as a rising Trump administration star, she was quietly edged out of her post last month, and the White House just pulled her nomination to fill an important Treasury Department post.

There have been rumblings that the McCabe investigation was botched. Kamil Shields, a prosecutor who reportedly grew frustrated by her supervisors’ inordinate delays in making decisions about the McCabe probe, ultimately left the Justice Department to take a private-practice job. Another prosecutor, David Kent, quit last summer as DOJ dithered over the decision on whether to prosecute. Things became so drawn out that the investigating grand jury’s term lapsed. Meanwhile, the Justice Department endorsed Liu’s aggressive decision to bring a thin, politically fraught false-statements case against former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig, in connection with lobbying for a foreign country — the sort of crime that is rarely prosecuted. Craig was swiftly acquitted. Reportedly, Liu advocated charging McCabe, but the DOJ may have harbored doubts about her judgment.

No matter the outcome, the Justice Department stood to take some hits if McCabe had been charged. Focus on McCabe’s leak would have drawn attention to pressure DOJ officials had put on the Bureau over the Clinton Foundation investigation (which, reportedly, is likely to be closed without charges). It would also renew interest in the question of whether the FBI improperly allowed McCabe to play a role in Clinton-related investigations when his wife, as a political candidate, got major funding from Clinton-tied sources.

Moreover, new Freedom of Information Act disclosures — made to meet a deadline set by District Judge Reggie Walton, which may explain the timing of the non-prosecution announcement — indicate that the Justice Department and FBI did not comply with regulations in what appears to be the rushed termination of McCabe, adding heft to the former deputy director’s claim that he was being singled out for abusive treatment, potentially including prosecution, because of vengeful politics.

On that score, Judge Walton took pains to decry the fusillade of tweets directed at McCabe by President Trump. I must note here that if a district U.S. attorney publicly labeled as a liar a suspect the Justice Department had indicted for false statements, that U.S. attorney would be sanctioned by the court. The U.S. attorneys, like the rest of the Justice Department, work for Trump. The president is correct when he insists, as he did this week, that he has the constitutional power to intervene in Justice Department matters. But that means he is subject to the same legal obligations that inhibit his Justice Department subordinates. Those obligations include protecting McCabe’s right to a fair trial — a duty the president may chafe at, but which is part of the deal when you take an oath to preserve the Constitution and execute the laws faithfully.

If you envision Judge Walton as part of the Obama-appointed robed resistance, check your premises. He is a no-nonsense jurist originally named to the D.C. Superior Court by President Reagan, and then to the federal district court by President George W. Bush. As Politico reports, he had this to say about President Trump’s commentary on the McCabe investigation:

The public is listening to what’s going on, and I don’t think people like the fact that you got somebody at the top basically trying to dictate whether somebody should be prosecuted. . . . I just think it’s a banana republic when we go down that road. . . . I think there are a lot of people on the outside who perceive that there is undo inappropriate pressure being brought to bear. . . . It’s just, it’s very disturbing that we’re in the mess that we’re in in that regard. . . . I just think the integrity of the process is being unduly undermined by inappropriate comments and actions on the part of people at the top of our government. . . . I think it’s very unfortunate. And I think as a government and as a society we’re going to pay a price at some point for this.

If you want to know why Attorney General Barr was warning this week that the president’s tweets are undermining the Justice Department’s pursuit of its law-enforcement mission, Judge Walton’s words are worth heeding. I have been making this point since the start of the Trump presidency. If you want people held accountable for their crimes, you have to ensure their fundamental right to due process. When the government poisons the well, the bad guys reap the benefits.

Finally, we must note that when the District of Columbia is the venue for any prosecution with political overtones, Justice Department charging decisions must factor in the jury pool, which is solidly anti-Trump.

The proof that McCabe willfully deceived investigators appears strong — it is noteworthy that IG Horowitz, who has strained to give the FBI the benefit of the doubt in many dubious contexts, was unequivocal in slamming McCabe. Nevertheless, a D.C. jury would be weighing that evidence, as discounted by whatever pro-McCabe slant reluctant prosecution witnesses put on it. And the jury would be weighing against that evidence (a) whatever problems caused prosecutors at the U.S. attorney’s office to beg off, and more significantly, (b) defense arguments that McCabe would not have been fired or prosecuted if not for the fact that he had gotten crosswise with a president of the United States whom at least some of the jurors are apt to dislike.

McCabe is not out of the woods yet, of course: The Durham investigation is a separate matter, and it is continuing. But it is unclear whether he will face any criminal charges arising from that inquiry, whereas the now-dead-and-buried false-statements case against him looked cut-and-dried.

The FBI’s former deputy director, though he undeniably misled investigators, remains a commentator at CNN. In the meantime, Papadopoulos is a felon convicted and briefly imprisoned for misleading investigators, while Flynn and Stone are awaiting sentencing on their false-statements charges. That covers both tiers of our justice system.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/02/why-wasnt-andrew-mccabe-charged/

 

US won’t charge ex-FBI official McCabe, a Trump target

an hour ago
 In this June 7, 2017, file photo, then FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe listens during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors have declined to charge former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, closing an investigation into whether the longtime target of President Donald Trump’s ire lied to federal officials about his involvement in a news media disclosure, McCabe’s legal team said Friday.

The decision, coming at the end of a tumultuous week between the Justice Department and the White House, is likely to further agitate a president who has loudly complained that federal prosecutors have pursued cases against his allies but not against his perceived political enemies.

The case was handled by the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, which was at the center of a public rift with Justice Department leadership this week over the recommended sentence for Trump ally Roger Stone. Senior Justice Department officials overruled a decision on a recommended prison sentence that they felt was too harsh, prompting the trial team to quit the case. Attorney General William Barr also took a rare public swipe at Trump by saying in a television interview that the president’s tweets about the Stone case and other matters were making his job “impossible.”

Separately, the Justice Department has begun reviewing the handling of the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn, a person familiar with the matter said Friday.

On Friday, prosecutors notified McCabe’s attorneys in a phone call and a letter that they were closing the case. The letter, signed by the chief of the office’s public corruption unit, did not give a precise reason but said the decision was reached after “careful consideration” and “based on the totality of the circumstances and all of the information known to the government at this time.”

McCabe’s lawyers, Michael Bromwich and David Schertler, said they were gratified by the decision.

“At long last, justice has been done in this matter,” the lawyers said in a statement. “We said at the outset of the criminal investigation, almost two years ago, that if the facts and the law determined the result, no charges would be brought.”

Speaking Friday on CNN, where he works as a contributor, McCabe said it was an “absolute disgrace” that the investigation had taken so long and that he was relieved to be done with a process that he described as “so unbelievably tense.”

Though federal prosecutors wrote that they consider the matter closed, Justice Department actions in the last few months have proven unpredictable, with a willingness to scrutinize or revisit decisions that had appeared resolved.

McCabe, a frequent target of Trump’s attacks, has denied that he intentionally misled anyone. He has said his 2018 firing — for what the Justice Department called “lack of candor” — was politically motivated. He sued the Justice Department in August, saying officials had used the inspector general’s conclusions as a pretext to rid the FBI of leaders Trump perceived as biased against him.

The decision is likely to further exacerbate tensions between Trump and Barr, who before speaking out in the television interview had privately complained to aides and the president himself that Trump’s comments about the Justice Department were undercutting his political agenda and raising questions about the department’s credibility. The White House was not given a heads-up about the decision beforehand, a person familiar with the matter said. The person spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.

The moment came against a backdrop of growing anger from Trump at the Justice Department. The president has seethed that more of his political enemies have not been charged, included former FBI Director James Comey and his associates.

The president was particularly incensed no charges were filed over Comey’s handling of memos about his interactions with Trump, a matter that was referred to the Justice Department for potential prosecution, according to a White House official and Republican close to the White House who weren’t authorized to speak publicly about private discussions and spoke on condition of anonymity.

The president angrily denounced the decision and berated Barr over it, according to the officials. Aides expected that the decision not to charge McCabe could produce a similar eruption of rage. Trump did not address the matter during a media appearance Friday.

Trump has also repeatedly complained about FBI Director Christopher Wray in recent months, saying he has not done enough to rid the bureau of people who are disloyal to Trump.

It was not immediately clear what had prompted a review of the Flynn case, though the person familiar with the matter said U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen of St. Louis was working on it. The New York Times first reported Jensen’s involvement.

The decision to spare McCabe criminal charges eliminates the prospect of a sensational trial that would have refocused public attention on the chaotic months of 2016, when the FBI was entangled in presidential politics through investigations touching both main contenders — Democrat Hillary Clinton and Trump, her Republican opponent.

The criminal investigation arose from an October 2016 story in The Wall Street Journal that described internal debates roiling the FBI and the Justice Department weeks before the presidential election about how aggressively the Clinton Foundation should be investigated. The article recounted a particularly tense phone call between McCabe and a senior Justice Department official.

The inspector general’s report said McCabe told internal investigators that he had not authorized anyone at the FBI to speak with the reporter and that he did not know who did. The report said McCabe ultimately corrected that account and confirmed that he had encouraged the conversation with the reporter to counter a narrative that he thought was false.

McCabe has denied any wrongdoing and has said he was distracted by the tumult surrounding the FBI and the White House during the times he was questioned. One of the interviews took place the same day that Comey was fired.

“During these inquiries, I answered questions truthfully and as accurately as I could amidst the chaos that surrounded me,” McCabe has said in a statement. “And when I thought my answers were misunderstood, I contacted investigators to correct them.”

McCabe has been a target of Trump’s attacks since even before he was elected, after news emerged in the fall of 2016 that McCabe’s wife had accepted campaign contributions from a political action committee associated with ex-Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe during an unsuccessful run for the state Senate there.

https://apnews.com/ec85aa4a4fdc5a36b7b85c7a34f1b8f9

DOJ drops leak case vs. McCabe, judge said White House involvement like a ‘banana republic’

The judge, a George W. Bush appointee, said “the fact that you got somebody at the top basically trying to dictate whether somebody should be prosecuted” was like a “banana republic.”
Image: Andrew McCabe, acting director of the FBI, at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in Washington on May 11, 2017.

Andrew McCabe, acting director of the FBI, at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in Washington on May 11, 2017.Andrew Harrer / Bloomberg via Getty Images file

By Tom Winter and Dareh Gregorian

The Department of Justice has told lawyers for former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe that he will not face criminal charges for allegedly lying to investigators about a leak to the media, the ex-official’s attorneys said Friday.

The decision was released on the same day it was revealed that a federal judge had expressed concerns months ago that McCabe’s case was looking like a “banana republic” prosecution.

“We write to inform you that, after careful consideration, the government has decided not to pursue criminal charges against your client,” J.P. Cooney of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, D.C., told McCabe’s attorneys in a letter Friday. “Based on the totality of the circumstances and all of the information known to the government at this time, we consider the matter closed.”

McCabe’s lawyers Michael R. Bromwich and David Schertler responded in a statement, saying, “At long last, justice has been done in this matter.”

President Donald Trump had publicly urged that action be taken against McCabe, the former deputy FBI director who briefly became acting head of the agency after Trump fired James Comey in 2017.

“He LIED! LIED! LIED!” Trump wrote in one 2018 tweet about McCabe after the Justice Department’s inspector general found McCabe “lacked candor” when being interviewed about whether he was a source for two news articles pertaining to the FBI in 2016.

The Justice Department’s announcement came one day after Attorney General William Barr pushed back against criticism he’s using the department to do Trump’s bidding, and said Trump’s tweeting about his agency’s work was undercutting his authority.

“Public statements and tweets made about the department, about people in the department, our men and women here, about cases pending in the department and about judges before whom we have cases make it impossible for me to do my job and to assure the courts and the department that we’re doing our work with integrity,” Barr, who was sworn in a year ago Friday, told ABC News.

McCabe told CNN on Friday that “the timing is curious” but he was relieved that the Justice Department “did the right thing today.”

“To have this horrific black cloud that’s been hanging over me and my family for almost the last two years, to have that finally lifted is just unbelievable,” he said. “It’s a relief that I’m not sure I can really explain to you adequately. It’s just a very emotional moment for my whole family.”

McCabe has denied intentionally misleading investigators. He told CNN that he has maintained from the day the inspector general’s report came out that if investigators “followed the law and they followed the facts, that I would have nothing to worry about. But as the president’s interest in pursuing his perceived political enemies continued over the last two years, we were getting more and more concerned about where this would end up.”

Those worries had increased in recent days, he told the network.

“I’ve been greatly concerned by what I’ve seen take place in the White House and in the Department of Justice, quite frankly, in the last week,” McCabe said. “And certainly the president’s kind of revenge tirade following his acquittal in the impeachment proceeding has only kind of amplified my concerns about what would happen in my own case.”

The Justice Department’s decision came the same day it was required by a judge to make details about the McCabe investigation public in a case stemming from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

The court transcripts, released after the Justice Department’s letter to McCabe’s lawyers, show prosecutors struggling with how to proceed in his case, and the judge in the matter expressing concerns about political pressure

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/justice-department-drops-leak-case-against-former-fbi-acting-head-n1137066

Story 2: Department of Justice Unseals 16-Count Indictment Against Huawei To Steal Trade Secrets of Six U.S. Companies — Videos 

New U.S. charges against Huawei

The US DOJ and the FBI have announced a 16 count indictment against Huawei

Huawei faces new charges in US

US charges Huawei with racketeering

Is America right to fear Huawei? | The Economist

DOJ announces criminal charges against Huawei

Jan 28, 2019

DOJ announces indictments against China’s Huawei

Prosecutors Hit Huawei With New Charges For Allegedly Working With Iran | NBC News NOW

U.S. unveils new charges against Chinese telecom giant Huawei

Riley Walters: Trump Can Be Tough on Huawei and Keep Negotiating on Trade With China

Live: Huawei CEO speaks on ‘averting tech war’ at Davos

Extradition hearing begins for Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou

Does China have a backdoor to your phone?

Huawei: Rises After US Ban

Meng extradition case: What you should know | Vancouver Sun

Special Report: Huawei – Connected & Contested

Oct 1, 2019

Huawei probed for security, espionage risk

Oct 7, 2012

Investment in US tech will reduce Huawei threat: Secretary of the Army

[youtubehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UtzbA0qQgM]

DOJ hits Huawei with NEW charges for ‘plotting to steal trade secrets’ from SIX US companies including Cisco and T-Mobile by ‘offering employees cash bounties and sending spy with farcical ‘Weihua’ badge to trade shows’

  • DoJ brought new charges against Huawei in indictment unsealed on Thursday 
  • Accuses Chinese tech giant of a deliberate ‘campaign’ to steal US trade secrets
  • Details bounties Huawei allegedly offered to staff to steal proprietary data
  • Describes brazen spy with ‘Weihua’ badge breaking into trade show booth
  • Though not named in indictment, Cisco and T-Mobile are among alleged victims
  • Feds also claim Huawei covered up secret subsidiary operating in Iran
  • CFO Meng Wanzhoua is still fighting extradition from Canada on Iran charges 

The Department of Justice has announced new criminal charges against Huawei, accusing the Chinese tech giant of being engaged in a ‘decades-long’ effort to steal trade secrets from a slew of US companies.

The 16-count superseding indictment unsealed on Thursday adds RICO charges to the criminal case against Huawei and its CFO Meng Wanzhoua, who is currently fighting extradition in Canada.

The charges come in addition to previous criminal charges accusing Huawei and Wanzhoua of operating a secret subsidiary in Iran and lying to U.S. financial institutions about the violation of sanctions on that country.

The new charges detail a brazen decades-long scheme to steal trade secrets from at least six U.S. companies. Cisco and T-Mobile are among the alleged victims in the case, though the companies are not actually named in the new indictment.

Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei is seen with Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2015. US officials accuse the company of building a secret back door into its mobile network hardware

Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei is seen with Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2015. US officials accuse the company of building a secret back door into its mobile network hardware

Prosecutors say that in 2013, Huawei instituted a cash bounty program ‘to reward employees who obtained confidential information from competitors’ and that the more valuable the secrets were, the more the company paid out.

The indictment details a shocking incident from 2004, at a trade show in Chicago, where prosecutors say a Huawei employee was busted in the middle of the night while breaking into a competitor’s booth.

The employee was wearing a bogus badge identifying him as an employee of ‘Weihua’, which is the syllables of Huawei reversed, and was caught taking pictures of the interior circuit boards of a competitor’s product, according to the indictment.

A Huawei spokesman denied the allegations, saying that the indictment was ‘part of an attempt to irrevocably damage Huawei’s reputation and its business for reasons related to competition rather than law enforcement.’

The company called the racketeering accusation ‘nothing more than a contrived repackaging of a handful of civil allegations that are almost 20 years old.’

Huawei pleaded not guilty to the earlier indictment unsealed against the company in January 2019, which charged it with bank and wire fraud, violating sanctions against Iran, and obstructing justice.

Wanzhoua, the CFO, was arrested in December 2018 in Canada on charges in the prior indictment, but she has protesting her innocence and fighting extradition to the US. She is the daughter of Huawei’s founder and CEO, 75-year-old Ren Zengfei.

Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhoua was arrested in December 2018 in Canada on charges in the initial Department of Justice indictment against the Chinese tech company. She is protesting her innocence and fighting extradition to the US.  She is pictured wearing a court-ordered ankle monitor last month

Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhoua was arrested in December 2018 in Canada on charges in the initial Department of Justice indictment against the Chinese tech company. She is protesting her innocence and fighting extradition to the US.  She is pictured wearing a court-ordered ankle monitor last month

Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou arrives at extradition hearing

The new indictment also includes ‘new allegations about Huawei and its subsidiaries’ involvement in business and technology projects in countries subject to sanctions, such as Iran and North Korea’.

The DoJ asserts that the Chinese company even tired to cover up the fact they were doing business with such countries, by using code names. ‘A2’ reportedly referred to Iran, and ‘A9’ is alleged to have referred to North Korea.

The new indictment is the latest effort in a global campaign by the United States against the company, which Washington has warned could spy on customers for Beijing. The United States also placed Huawei on a trade blacklist last year, citing national security concerns.

‘The indictment paints a damning portrait of an illegitimate organization that lacks any regard for the law,’ U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Richard Burr and vice chairman Mark Warner said in a joint statement.

The Republican and Democratic Senators called it ‘an important step in combating Huawei’s state-directed and criminal enterprise.’

In a statement on Tuesday, the DoJ alleges that Huawei’s ‘campaign’ to steal trade secrets from US competitors formed part of their global growth strategy.

The DoJ statement alleges that Huawei even launched a policy ‘instituting a bonus program to reward employees who misappropriated intellectual property from competitors.’

Prosecutors allege some Huawei employees entered into confidential agreements with the six US companies, before violating such agreements by then handing over the information to the Chinese tech giant.

Thus, the DoJ statements alleges that ‘Huawei’s efforts to steal trade secrets and other sophisticated US technology were successful.’

Trump administration officials, increasingly intent on preventing China from global technological domination, have urged allies not to use Huawei hardware

Trump administration officials, increasingly intent on preventing China from global technological domination, have urged allies not to use Huawei hardware

‘As a consequence of its campaign to steal this technology and intellectual property, Huawei was able to drastically cut its research and development costs and associated delays, giving the company a significant and unfair competitive advantage,’ the statement goes on to say.

The case was unsealed as the Trump administration is raising national security and surveillance concerns about Huawei, the world’s largest telecommunications equipment manufacturer.

Huawei, one of the largest tech firms and a major telecom equipment maker, has been blacklisted by Washington amid concerns of its ties to the Chinese government and intelligence services.

New charges have been filed in the US against Huawei (Dominic Lipinski/PA)

New charges have been filed in the US against Huawei (Dominic Lipinski/PA)

Earlier this week, White House national security adviser Robert O’Brien alleged that Huawei builds secret back doors into its hardware that allow it to covertly access mobile-phone networks around the world.

‘We have evidence that Huawei has the capability secretly to access sensitive and personal information in systems it maintains and sells around the world,’ O’Brien told the Wall Street Journal.

US officials say that Huawei’s back door allows the company to access network data without the carrier’s knowledge, potentially giving the Chinese government a potent spy tool.

Huawei denied the allegations, telling the Journal that it ‘has never and will never do anything that would compromise or endanger the security of networks and data of its clients.’

The U.S. has long tried to convince its allies, such as the U.K. and Germany, to ban the use of Huawei telecom equipment in the building of 5G networks.

 Germany’s legislature is set to vote in the coming weeks on a bill that would allow Huawei full access to its 5G market if the company provides security guarantees.

WHO IS MENG WANZHOU?

Meng Wanzhou, 46, is widely assumed to be the heiress of her billionaire father Ren Zhengfei who founded Huawei in 1987

 

Meng Wanzhou, 46, is widely assumed to be the heiress of her billionaire father Ren Zhengfei who founded Huawei in 1987

Meng Wanzhou, also known as Sabrina Meng and Cathy Meng, is the daughter and eldest child of Huawei’s founder Ren Zhengfei, 74, by his first wife Meng Jun.

Billed as a ‘Red Princess’, the 47-year-old is widely assumed to be the heiress of her former Communist soldier father, who founded the world’s current second largest smartphone seller at the age of 43 with just 21,000 yuan (£2,388).

Ms Meng, who is also the Vice-Chairman of Huawei, was ranked No. 12 by Frobes on the list of China’s most outstanding businesswomen in 2018.

She graduated from Huazhong University of Science and Technology in central China’s Wuhan city.

She worked in a bank for a year upon graduation before taking up a position at Huawei’s front desk in 1993 to answer phone calls.

Over the years, Ms Meng worked as the director of the international accounting department, CFO of Huawei’s Hong Kong branch office, president of the accounts management department and brought Huawei to its current success.

Ms Meng has a brother and a 20-year-old half-sister Annabel Yao who is a ballerina and debutante.

Annabel is said to be extremely international and have lived in Britain, Hong Kong and Shanghai.

She was one of the 19 young women to be presented at the 25th annual Bal des Débutantes held at the Shangri-La Hotel in Paris in 2018.

 

Story 3: Just Walk Away From Two Party Tyranny Big Government Parties — Walk Away Renee — Videos

See the source image

Walk Away Renee – The left Banke

Walk Away Renee
And when I see the sign that points one way
The lot we used to pass by every day
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
The empty sidewalks on my block are not the same
You’re not to blame
From deep inside the tears that I’m forced to cry
From deep inside the pain that I chose to hide
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
Now as the rain beats down upon my weary eyes
For me it cries
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
Now as the rain beats down upon my weary eyes
For me it cries
Your name and mine inside a heart upon a wall
Still finds a way to haunt me, though they’re so small
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
The empty sidewalks on my block are not the same
You’re not to blame
Source: LyricFind
Songwriters: Bob Calilli / Mike Brown / Tony Sansone
Walk Away Renee lyrics © Warner Chappell Music, Inc, Round Hill Music Big Loud Songs, BMG Rights Management, Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, Carlin America Inc
See the source image

George Carlin – It’s a Big Club and You Ain’t In It! The American Dream

Tucker: Our ruling class is authoritarian, not Trump

Federal budget deficit to hit $1 trillion in 2020: CBO forecast

Walk Away Renée + The Left Banke + Lyrics

George Carlin Politicians

See the source image

Image result for the public sucksSee the source image

The Left Banke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

The Left Banke
The Left Banke 1966.jpg

The Left Banke in 1966
Background information
Origin New YorkNew York, U.S.
Genres Baroque pop[1]
Years active
  • 1965–1969
  • 1971
  • 1978
  • 2011–2012
  • 2015–present
Labels
Associated acts
  • Christopher & The Chaps
  • The Magic Plants
  • Montage
  • Stories
  • The Beckies
  • Sam Kogon
Members

The Left Banke is an American baroque pop band, formed in New York City in 1965.[1] They are best remembered for their two US hit singles, “Walk Away Renée” and “Pretty Ballerina“.[2] The band often used what the music press referred to as “baroque” string arrangements, which led to their music being variously termed as “Bach-rock” or “baroque rock“.[3] The band’s vocal harmonies borrowed from contemporaries such as The BeatlesThe Zombies, and other British Invasion groups.[1]

In 2004, Rolling Stone placed “Walk Away Renée” at #220 in its list of “The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time“.[4]

Contents

History

1965–69: early years and disbandment

The Left Banke was formed in 1965 and consisted of keyboard player/songwriter Michael Browndrummer/singer George Cameron, bass guitarist/singer Tom Finnsinger Steve Martin (who also used the name Steve Martin Caro), and drummer Warren David-Schierhorst. Brown’s father, Harry Lookofsky, a well-known session violinist, ran a studio in New York and took an interest in the band’s music, acting as producermanager and publisher.[5]After some initial recording sessions, David-Schierhorst was ousted, with Cameron switching to drums and Jeff Winfield on guitar. Brown’s song, “Walk Away Renee”, was sold to Smash Records, a subsidiary of Mercury Records, and became a huge hit in late 1966. The band’s second single, “Pretty Ballerina”, also written by Brown, charted in early 1967, and The Left Banke released an album entitled Walk Away Renee/Pretty Ballerina, by which time, Rick Brand had replaced Winfield on guitar.

Tension between Brown and the rest of the band soon began to surface. When “Walk Away Renee” belatedly became a hit, the original band had become inactive. Brown decided to capitalize on the single’s success by assembling a new version of The Left Banke for touring purposes, with Bert Sommer on lead vocals, original drummer Warren David, and (future member of Spinal TapMichael McKean on guitar. Brown also recorded a single, “Ivy, Ivy” b/w “And Suddenly” as The Left Banke, with Sommer and a group of session musicians.[6][7] The remaining members of the band hired attorneys to issue a cease and desist order and urged their fan club to boycott the record,[8] which led to confusion among radio stations over which “Left Banke” to support. Radio and Smash Records ultimately removed their support from the single, which subsequently failed to make the Billboard Hot 100. The “New” Left Banke never performed live. “And Suddenly” was eventually recorded by a group called The Cherry People and became a minor hit.[9] McKean would later find fame as an actor (Laverne & ShirleyThis Is Spinal TapBetter Call Saul).

In late 1967, the original group reunited and recorded more material, including the single “Desiree.” Brown left the group permanently shortly thereafter and was replaced for touring purposes by Emmett Lake. Cameron, Finn and Martin continued to record and tour, with Tom Feher replacing Lake on keyboards and writing half of the band’s new material. The songs recorded by various incarnations of the group in 1967 and 1968 were assembled into a second LPThe Left Banke Too, which was released in November 1968. This album featured backing vocals by a young Steven Tyler (who later became the lead singer of Aerosmith) on “Nice To See You”, “My Friend Today” and “Dark Is The Bark”. The band continued playing live in 1969, without Martin, but soon disbanded due to lack of success and financial problems. Later that same year, Brown and Martin reunited in the studio to record another single as The Left Banke, “Myrah” b/w “Pedestal”, which was their final single for Smash Records.

1971–present: various reunions

In 1971, Brown, Cameron, Finn and Martin reunited briefly to record two songs for the movie Hot Parts. The songs, “Love Songs in the Night” and “Two by Two”, were released as a Steve Martin solo single on Buddah Records, despite featuring contributions from four founding members of The Left Banke. In 1972, producer Les Fradkin offered to produce the group for a project on Bell Records. Although these sessions were not released at the time, one of the songs, “I Could Make It Last Forever”, composed by Fradkin and Diane Ellis, was released on Fradkin’s Goin’ Back solo CD in 2006. It was a rare recording since it featured Caro, Finn, Cameron and Brown, along with Brown’s father, violinist Harry Lookofsky. Fradkin sang and played 12-string guitar on the sessions. In 1978, Martin, Cameron and Finn reunited as The Left Banke to record an album’s worth of material which unfortunately was not released at the time. However, a single from these 1978 sessions, “Queen of Paradise” (b/w “And One Day”), was released in late 1978 with modest success. The album was eventually issued by Relix Records in 1986 under the title Strangers on a Train (Voices Calling in Europe). However, the album did little to restore the popularity of the group.

After leaving The Left Banke in 1967, Michael Brown helped form the band, Montage. Although Brown was never an official member of Montage, his presence is unmistakable in its music.[10] The band released one self-titled album in 1969, which included a re-recording of The Left Banke song “Desiree”, before Brown left. Brown’s next project was the band Stories, featuring singer Ian Lloyd. The band had a hit in 1973 with “Brother Louie“, which reached #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 charts.[5] However, Brown had left the group after their 2nd album “About Us”, but before the success of “Brother Louie”. Brown’s next project was with The Beckies, although the band achieved only modest success and Brown soon left.

In 1992, Mercury Records released a Left Banke compilation titled There’s Gonna Be a Storm: The Complete Recordings 1966–1969. It was intended to bring together the band’s entire recorded output from the years 1966 to 1969, although a 1969 outtake titled “Foggy Waterfall”, which had previously appeared on two earlier compilations, was not included.

In 1994, Michael Brown and his wife Yvonne Vitale produced and released an album titled On This Moment. Between 2001 and 2006, Brown hosted a series of recording sessions at his home studio with Ian Lloyd (vocals), Tom Finn (bass guitar/vocals), Jim McAllister (guitar), and Jon Ihle (drums).[11]

In 2005, Alice Cooper included a cover version of “Pretty Ballerina” on his album Dirty Diamonds. In 2006, ex-member of The Bangles Susanna Hoffs and Matthew Sweet, as Sid ‘n’ Susie, covered “She May Call You Up Tonight” for their first album Under the Covers, Vol. 1. In addition, Stuart Murdoch of the band Belle and Sebastian has cited The Left Banke as one of the early influences on the sound of the band.[12]

Former guitarist Jeff Winfield died of complications from pneumonia on June 13, 2009, at age 60.[3]

2011–12

The previous touring version of The Left Banke featured one original member, George Cameron. Initially, Tom Finn and George Cameron reformed The Left Banke in March 2011, tapping New York City’s Mike Fornatale (already a veteran of numerous other 60s band reunions, including The Monks and Moby Grape) to sing lead vocals in Steve Martin Caro’s stead. The reunited group also featured new players: Paul Alves (lead guitar, backing vocals), Charly Cazalet (bass), Mickey Finn (keyboards), Rick Reil (drums, percussion, backing vocals) and second keyboardist/synth player Joe McGinty (replaced by John Spurney in 2012). They appeared live at Joe’s Pub in New York City on March 5, 2011, and March 6, 2011, to sold-out audiences. In April 2011, Tom Finn revealed in a Facebook posting that he had reformed the group,[13] with two shows planned for July in New York City.[14][15] Tom Finn only performed with the re-formed group in 2011, after which he left due to disagreements with Cameron and due to back trouble.

In early 2011, Sundazed released reissues of the two Smash vinyl albums on CD and LP, utilizing the original running order and artwork.

In February 2012, Tom Finn notified the YouTube community that the Left Banke was in the process of creating a new record featuring contributions from co-founder Michael Brown.

George Cameron (3rd from left) and Tom Finn (Center, 4th from left) with band during their 2012 reunion tour.

On April 29, 2012, Brown joined the reunited Left Banke on stage at B.B. King’s in New York City for a version of his “Pretty Ballerina.” His performance was greeted with a standing ovation. Rick Brand, guitarist with the band in 1966-67 was also in attendance. Tom Finn sang a newly written song called “City Life” which showed a heavier rock version of the Left Banke with baroque string section intact. No new recordings begun in 2012 were ever released, and Brown died in 2015.

At the beginning of their reunion dates, the group was joined onstage by a two or three-piece string section and even a guest oboe player for one or two shows. Both Michael Brown and George Cameron were in touch with Steve Martin Caro, who wanted to rejoin the group, but was unable to tour in 2012 due to previous commitments.

Unrealized reunions

On March 18, 2015, the day before Mike Brown’s death, it was announced that original vocalist Steve Martin Caro officially rejoined the current touring version of The Left Banke. Photos on The Left Banke official Facebook and Twitter pages displayed Steve signing a contract. Two 2015 shows featured co-headliner Ian Lloyd of Stories and Sam Kogon as vocalist. The re-formed Cameron band played for the last time twice in 2015; once in Sellersville, PA and once in Natick, MA. No shows under any Left Banke configuration have been performed since 2015, and by 2020 the major players of 1966 were all deceased except for the disabled Tom Finn.

In January, 2018, it was announced on the official Facebook page operated by Steve Martin Caro and George Cameron that they were planning a tour. Several photos of Steve Martin Caro rehearsing with George Cameron and guitarist Sam Kogon were posted with a message which stated “it was Steve’s first time behind the microphone in over 15 years. We went through and workshopped much of the Left Banke catalog.” However, Cameron passed away five months later, before any performances could take place under this collaboration.

Deaths

Michael Brown died from heart disease on March 19, 2015, at age 65. Brown had been writing new material and planned to participate in the 2015 reunion of The Left Banke with Steve Martin Caro and George Cameron. Brown’s funeral and memorial service was held on March 25, 2015 at Fort Lee Gospel Church in Fort Lee, New Jersey.[16]

Justo George Cameron (born October 16, 1947 in New York City) died of cancer at Mount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan on June 24, 2018, at age 70.[17] Thomas Leo Feher died from heart failure on August 5, 2018.[18] Steve Martin Caro died from heart disease on January 14, 2020. He was 71.[19] This left Tom Finn (later a renowned disc jockey) as the only surviving member from the original “Walk Away Renée” lineup.

Band members

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Left_Banke

Story 3: $19 Billion of 30-Year Bonds Sold At Record Low Yield of 2.06% — Inverted Yield Curve Flashes Recession Warning — Videos

Dow Flatlines While Fed’s Recession Alarm Screams

Treasury Sells 30-Year Bonds at Record Low Yield

Fear that the coronavirus will slow global growth has helped push down Treasury yields in recent weeks

The Treasury sold $19 billion of 30-year bonds on Thursday afternoon.

PHOTO: CHRIS WATTIE/REUTERS

The Treasury sold $19 billion of 30-year bonds on Thursday afternoon at a 2.061% yield. That beat the previous record of 2.170% set last October, according to data from BMO Capital Markets.

The auction came as Treasury yields generally moved lower after Chinese officials changed the way they counted coronavirus infections, leading to a big jump in the number of confirmed cases in the country’s Hubei province. The yield on the benchmark 10-year U.S. Treasury note settled at 1.616%, compared with 1.629% Wednesday.

Yields fall when bond prices rise.

Fear that the coronavirus will slow global growth has helped push down Treasury yields in recent weeks. Other factors include persistently soft inflation, which has limited one of the main threats to the value of longer-term Treasurys, analysts said.

Investors have also grown more comfortable buying 30-year bonds because they view them as insurance against losses in riskier assets, said Jon Hill, a U.S. interest-rates strategist at BMO. Prices of 30-year bonds increase more for every one-percentage point decline in yields than those of shorter-term bonds. That means on days like Thursday, when investors are selling stocks and buying bonds, the holders of 30-year bonds are well-hedged, Mr. Hill said.

Thursday’s level doesn’t represent the lowest point that the 30-year bond yield has ever reached. Last August, it settled as low as 1.941%, but yields rose again before the next 30-year auction in September.

In recent years, low Treasury yields have, at times, caused U.S. officials to flirt with issuing bonds with maturities beyond 30 years to lock in low interest rates for a longer period.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said last September that the Treasury Department was “very seriously considering” issuing a 50-year bond. The department, however, dropped that idea due to a lack of interest from bond dealers. Instead, it recently announced plans to issue 20-year bonds, which haven’t been issued regularly since the 1980s.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/treasury-to-sell-30-year-bonds-at-record-low-yield-11581614475

Story 4: Just Walk Away From Two Party Tyranny Big Government Parties — Walk Away Renee — Videos

See the source image

Walk Away Renee – The left Banke

Walk Away Renee
And when I see the sign that points one way
The lot we used to pass by every day
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
The empty sidewalks on my block are not the same
You’re not to blame
From deep inside the tears that I’m forced to cry
From deep inside the pain that I chose to hide
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
Now as the rain beats down upon my weary eyes
For me it cries
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
Now as the rain beats down upon my weary eyes
For me it cries
Your name and mine inside a heart upon a wall
Still finds a way to haunt me, though they’re so small
Just walk away Renee
You won’t see me follow you back home
The empty sidewalks on my block are not the same
You’re not to blame
Source: LyricFind
Songwriters: Bob Calilli / Mike Brown / Tony Sansone
Walk Away Renee lyrics © Warner Chappell Music, Inc, Round Hill Music Big Loud Songs, BMG Rights Management, Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, Carlin America Inc
See the source image

Tucker: Our ruling class is authoritarian, not Trump

Federal budget deficit to hit $1 trillion in 2020: CBO forecast

George Carlin – It’s a Big Club and You Ain’t In It! The American Dream

Walk Away Renée + The Left Banke + Lyrics

The Left Banke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

The Left Banke
The Left Banke 1966.jpg

The Left Banke in 1966
Background information
Origin New YorkNew York, U.S.
Genres Baroque pop[1]
Years active
  • 1965–1969
  • 1971
  • 1978
  • 2011–2012
  • 2015–present
Labels
Associated acts
  • Christopher & The Chaps
  • The Magic Plants
  • Montage
  • Stories
  • The Beckies
  • Sam Kogon
Members

The Left Banke is an American baroque pop band, formed in New York City in 1965.[1] They are best remembered for their two US hit singles, “Walk Away Renée” and “Pretty Ballerina“.[2] The band often used what the music press referred to as “baroque” string arrangements, which led to their music being variously termed as “Bach-rock” or “baroque rock“.[3] The band’s vocal harmonies borrowed from contemporaries such as The BeatlesThe Zombies, and other British Invasion groups.[1]

In 2004, Rolling Stone placed “Walk Away Renée” at #220 in its list of “The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time“.[4]

Contents

History

1965–69: early years and disbandment

The Left Banke was formed in 1965 and consisted of keyboard player/songwriter Michael Browndrummer/singer George Cameron, bass guitarist/singer Tom Finnsinger Steve Martin (who also used the name Steve Martin Caro), and drummer Warren David-Schierhorst. Brown’s father, Harry Lookofsky, a well-known session violinist, ran a studio in New York and took an interest in the band’s music, acting as producermanager and publisher.[5]After some initial recording sessions, David-Schierhorst was ousted, with Cameron switching to drums and Jeff Winfield on guitar. Brown’s song, “Walk Away Renee”, was sold to Smash Records, a subsidiary of Mercury Records, and became a huge hit in late 1966. The band’s second single, “Pretty Ballerina”, also written by Brown, charted in early 1967, and The Left Banke released an album entitled Walk Away Renee/Pretty Ballerina, by which time, Rick Brand had replaced Winfield on guitar.

Tension between Brown and the rest of the band soon began to surface. When “Walk Away Renee” belatedly became a hit, the original band had become inactive. Brown decided to capitalize on the single’s success by assembling a new version of The Left Banke for touring purposes, with Bert Sommer on lead vocals, original drummer Warren David, and (future member of Spinal TapMichael McKean on guitar. Brown also recorded a single, “Ivy, Ivy” b/w “And Suddenly” as The Left Banke, with Sommer and a group of session musicians.[6][7] The remaining members of the band hired attorneys to issue a cease and desist order and urged their fan club to boycott the record,[8] which led to confusion among radio stations over which “Left Banke” to support. Radio and Smash Records ultimately removed their support from the single, which subsequently failed to make the Billboard Hot 100. The “New” Left Banke never performed live. “And Suddenly” was eventually recorded by a group called The Cherry People and became a minor hit.[9] McKean would later find fame as an actor (Laverne & ShirleyThis Is Spinal TapBetter Call Saul).

In late 1967, the original group reunited and recorded more material, including the single “Desiree.” Brown left the group permanently shortly thereafter and was replaced for touring purposes by Emmett Lake. Cameron, Finn and Martin continued to record and tour, with Tom Feher replacing Lake on keyboards and writing half of the band’s new material. The songs recorded by various incarnations of the group in 1967 and 1968 were assembled into a second LPThe Left Banke Too, which was released in November 1968. This album featured backing vocals by a young Steven Tyler (who later became the lead singer of Aerosmith) on “Nice To See You”, “My Friend Today” and “Dark Is The Bark”. The band continued playing live in 1969, without Martin, but soon disbanded due to lack of success and financial problems. Later that same year, Brown and Martin reunited in the studio to record another single as The Left Banke, “Myrah” b/w “Pedestal”, which was their final single for Smash Records.

1971–present: various reunions

In 1971, Brown, Cameron, Finn and Martin reunited briefly to record two songs for the movie Hot Parts. The songs, “Love Songs in the Night” and “Two by Two”, were released as a Steve Martin solo single on Buddah Records, despite featuring contributions from four founding members of The Left Banke. In 1972, producer Les Fradkin offered to produce the group for a project on Bell Records. Although these sessions were not released at the time, one of the songs, “I Could Make It Last Forever”, composed by Fradkin and Diane Ellis, was released on Fradkin’s Goin’ Back solo CD in 2006. It was a rare recording since it featured Caro, Finn, Cameron and Brown, along with Brown’s father, violinist Harry Lookofsky. Fradkin sang and played 12-string guitar on the sessions. In 1978, Martin, Cameron and Finn reunited as The Left Banke to record an album’s worth of material which unfortunately was not released at the time. However, a single from these 1978 sessions, “Queen of Paradise” (b/w “And One Day”), was released in late 1978 with modest success. The album was eventually issued by Relix Records in 1986 under the title Strangers on a Train (Voices Calling in Europe). However, the album did little to restore the popularity of the group.

After leaving The Left Banke in 1967, Michael Brown helped form the band, Montage. Although Brown was never an official member of Montage, his presence is unmistakable in its music.[10] The band released one self-titled album in 1969, which included a re-recording of The Left Banke song “Desiree”, before Brown left. Brown’s next project was the band Stories, featuring singer Ian Lloyd. The band had a hit in 1973 with “Brother Louie“, which reached #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 charts.[5] However, Brown had left the group after their 2nd album “About Us”, but before the success of “Brother Louie”. Brown’s next project was with The Beckies, although the band achieved only modest success and Brown soon left.

In 1992, Mercury Records released a Left Banke compilation titled There’s Gonna Be a Storm: The Complete Recordings 1966–1969. It was intended to bring together the band’s entire recorded output from the years 1966 to 1969, although a 1969 outtake titled “Foggy Waterfall”, which had previously appeared on two earlier compilations, was not included.

In 1994, Michael Brown and his wife Yvonne Vitale produced and released an album titled On This Moment. Between 2001 and 2006, Brown hosted a series of recording sessions at his home studio with Ian Lloyd (vocals), Tom Finn (bass guitar/vocals), Jim McAllister (guitar), and Jon Ihle (drums).[11]

In 2005, Alice Cooper included a cover version of “Pretty Ballerina” on his album Dirty Diamonds. In 2006, ex-member of The Bangles Susanna Hoffs and Matthew Sweet, as Sid ‘n’ Susie, covered “She May Call You Up Tonight” for their first album Under the Covers, Vol. 1. In addition, Stuart Murdoch of the band Belle and Sebastian has cited The Left Banke as one of the early influences on the sound of the band.[12]

Former guitarist Jeff Winfield died of complications from pneumonia on June 13, 2009, at age 60.[3]

2011–12

The previous touring version of The Left Banke featured one original member, George Cameron. Initially, Tom Finn and George Cameron reformed The Left Banke in March 2011, tapping New York City’s Mike Fornatale (already a veteran of numerous other 60s band reunions, including The Monks and Moby Grape) to sing lead vocals in Steve Martin Caro’s stead. The reunited group also featured new players: Paul Alves (lead guitar, backing vocals), Charly Cazalet (bass), Mickey Finn (keyboards), Rick Reil (drums, percussion, backing vocals) and second keyboardist/synth player Joe McGinty (replaced by John Spurney in 2012). They appeared live at Joe’s Pub in New York City on March 5, 2011, and March 6, 2011, to sold-out audiences. In April 2011, Tom Finn revealed in a Facebook posting that he had reformed the group,[13] with two shows planned for July in New York City.[14][15] Tom Finn only performed with the re-formed group in 2011, after which he left due to disagreements with Cameron and due to back trouble.

In early 2011, Sundazed released reissues of the two Smash vinyl albums on CD and LP, utilizing the original running order and artwork.

In February 2012, Tom Finn notified the YouTube community that the Left Banke was in the process of creating a new record featuring contributions from co-founder Michael Brown.

George Cameron (3rd from left) and Tom Finn (Center, 4th from left) with band during their 2012 reunion tour.

On April 29, 2012, Brown joined the reunited Left Banke on stage at B.B. King’s in New York City for a version of his “Pretty Ballerina.” His performance was greeted with a standing ovation. Rick Brand, guitarist with the band in 1966-67 was also in attendance. Tom Finn sang a newly written song called “City Life” which showed a heavier rock version of the Left Banke with baroque string section intact. No new recordings begun in 2012 were ever released, and Brown died in 2015.

At the beginning of their reunion dates, the group was joined onstage by a two or three-piece string section and even a guest oboe player for one or two shows. Both Michael Brown and George Cameron were in touch with Steve Martin Caro, who wanted to rejoin the group, but was unable to tour in 2012 due to previous commitments.

Unrealized reunions

On March 18, 2015, the day before Mike Brown’s death, it was announced that original vocalist Steve Martin Caro officially rejoined the current touring version of The Left Banke. Photos on The Left Banke official Facebook and Twitter pages displayed Steve signing a contract. Two 2015 shows featured co-headliner Ian Lloyd of Stories and Sam Kogon as vocalist. The re-formed Cameron band played for the last time twice in 2015; once in Sellersville, PA and once in Natick, MA. No shows under any Left Banke configuration have been performed since 2015, and by 2020 the major players of 1966 were all deceased except for the disabled Tom Finn.

In January, 2018, it was announced on the official Facebook page operated by Steve Martin Caro and George Cameron that they were planning a tour. Several photos of Steve Martin Caro rehearsing with George Cameron and guitarist Sam Kogon were posted with a message which stated “it was Steve’s first time behind the microphone in over 15 years. We went through and workshopped much of the Left Banke catalog.” However, Cameron passed away five months later, before any performances could take place under this collaboration.

Deaths

Michael Brown died from heart disease on March 19, 2015, at age 65. Brown had been writing new material and planned to participate in the 2015 reunion of The Left Banke with Steve Martin Caro and George Cameron. Brown’s funeral and memorial service was held on March 25, 2015 at Fort Lee Gospel Church in Fort Lee, New Jersey.[16]

Justo George Cameron (born October 16, 1947 in New York City) died of cancer at Mount Sinai Hospital in Manhattan on June 24, 2018, at age 70.[17] Thomas Leo Feher died from heart failure on August 5, 2018.[18] Steve Martin Caro died from heart disease on January 14, 2020. He was 71.[19] This left Tom Finn (later a renowned disc jockey) as the only surviving member from the original “Walk Away Renée” lineup.

Band members

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Left_Banke

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1392-1399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1386-1391

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1379-1785

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1372-1378

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1363-1371

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1352-1362

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1343-1351

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1335-1342

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1326-1334

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1318-1325

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1310-1317

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1300-1309

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1291-1299

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1282-1290

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1276-1281

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1267-1275

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1266

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1256-1265

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1246-1255

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1236-1245

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1229-1235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1218-1128

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1210-1217

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1202-1209

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1197-1201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1190-1196

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1182-1189

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1174-1181

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1168-1173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1159-1167

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1151-1158

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1145-1150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1139-1144

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1131-1138

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1122-1130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1112-1121

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1101-1111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1091-1100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1082-1090

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1073-1081

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1066-1073

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1058-1065

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1048-1057

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1041-1047

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1033-1040

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1023-1032

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1017-1022

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1010-1016

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1001-1009

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 993-1000

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 984-992

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 977-983

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 970-976

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 963-969

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 955-962

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 946-954

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 938-945

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-937

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 793-799

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-792

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 777-784

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 769-776

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 759-768

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 751-758

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 745-750

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 738-744

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 732-737

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 727-731

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 720-726

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 713-719

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 705-712

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 695-704

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 685-694

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-684

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 668-674

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 660-667

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 651-659

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 644-650

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 637-643

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 629-636

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 617-628

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 608-616

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 575-584

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 565-574

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 556-564

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 1395, February 10, 2020, Story 1: Media Opinion Polls Manipulating American Public Opinion — Ignore The Big Lie Media Mob — Trump Should Win In Landslide Victory in 2020 — 70 Million Popular Votes and 330 Electoral College Votes — Revolution — Give Peace A Chance — Imagine — Videos — Story 2: President Trump Talks To America’s Governors At Business Summit — Videos — Story 3: Coronavirus Has Killed Killed 910 in China and Exceeds SARS Death Toll — Videos

Posted on February 11, 2020. Filed under: 2020 Democrat Candidates, 2020 President Candidates, 2020 Republican Candidates, Abortion, American History, Banking System, Blogroll, Breaking News, Budgetary Policy, Cartoons, China, Communications, Congress, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Defense Spending, Diseases, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Economics, Elections, Empires, Employment, European Union, First Amendment, Fiscal Policy, Flu, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Spending, Health, Health Care, History, House of Representatives, Human, Human Behavior, Labor Economics, Law, Life, Media, Medicare, Monetary Policy, National Interest, Networking, News, People, Pete Buttigieg, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Public Corruption, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Regulation, Rule of Law, Senate, Social Networking, Social Security, Spying on American People, Subversion, Surveillance/Spying, Tax Policy, Trade Policy, Treason, United States Constitution, United States of America, United States Supreme Court, Videos, Violence, Wealth, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 1395 February 10, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1394 February 7, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1393 February 6, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1392 February 5, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1391 February 4, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1390 February 3, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1389 January 31, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1388 January 30, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1387 January 29, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1386 January 28, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1385 January 27, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1384 January 24, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1383 January 23, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1382 January 22, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1381 January 21, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1380 January 17, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1379 January 16, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1378 January 15, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1377 January 14, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1376 January 13, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1375 December 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1374 December 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1373 December 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1372 December 10, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1371 December 9, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1370 December 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1369 December 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1368 December 4, 2019 

Pronk Pops Show 1367 December 3, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1366 December 2, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1365 November 22, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1364 November 21, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1363 November 20, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1362 November 19, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1361 November 18, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1360 November 15, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1359 November 14, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1358 November 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1357 November 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1356 November 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1355 November 8, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1354 November 7, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1353 November 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1352 November 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1351 November 4, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1350 November 1, 2019

See the source imageSee the source imageMore than 40,000 people have been infected with the virus and 910 are confirmed to have died, all but two of them in ChinaSee the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source image

See the source image

 

Story 1: Media Opinion Polls Manipulating American Public Opinion — Ignore The Big Lie Media Mob — Trump Should Win In Landslide Victory on Election Day November 3, 2020 — 70 Million Popular Votes and 330 Electoral College Votes — The Only Poll That Counts — Give Peace A Chance — Videos

See the source image

The Beatles – Revolution

Revolution

The Beatles

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know that you can count me out
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right
All right, all right
You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We all doing what we can
But if you want money
For people with minds that hate
All I can tell is brother you have to wait
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right
All right, all right
Ah
Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah…
You say you’ll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well, you know
You better free you mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don’t you know it’s gonna be all right
All right, all right
All right, all right, all right
All right, all right, all right
Source: Musixmatch

Byron York on more bad news for Joe Biden

Is Donald Trump’s Iowa Poll Lead A Death Knell for 2020 Democrats

Give Peace A Chance – Plastic Ono Band (official music video HD)

[youtub e=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3_0GqPvr4U]

Give Peace a Chance

Plastic Ono Band

Two, one-two-three-four!
Ev’rybody’s talking ’bout
Bagism, Shagism, Dragism, Madism, Ragism, Tagism
This-ism, that-ism, is-m, is-m, is-m
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
Hit it
C’mon, ev’rybody’s talking about
Ministers, sinisters, banisters and canisters
Bishops and Fishops and Rabbis and Popeyes and bye-bye, bye-byes
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
Let me tell you now
Ev’rybody’s talking ’bout
Revolution, evolution, masturbation, flagellation, regulation, integrations
Meditations, United Nations, congratulations
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
Ev’rybody’s talking ’bout
John and Yoko, Timmy Leary, Rosemary, Tommy Smothers, Bobby Dylan, Tommy Cooper
Derek Taylor, Norman Mailer, Alan Ginsberg, Hare Krishna, Hare, Hare Krishna
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
All we are saying is give peace a chance
Source: LyricFind
Songwriters: John Lennon
Give Peace a Chance lyrics © Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC, BMG Rights Management

Imagine – John Lennon & The Plastic Ono Band (w the Flux Fiddlers) (official music video HD long v)

Imagine

John Lennon

Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today (ah ah ah)
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
You may say that I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one
Source: LyricFind
Songwriters: John Winston Lennon
Imagine lyrics © Downtown Music Publishing

 

Election 2020 Presidential Polls

Monday, February 10
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary CNN/UNH Sanders 29, Buttigieg 22, Klobuchar 7, Warren 10, Biden 11, Yang 4, Gabbard 5, Steyer 1, Patrick, Bennet 0 Sanders +7
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 27, Buttigieg 19, Klobuchar 14, Warren 12, Biden 12, Yang 3, Gabbard 3, Steyer 2, Patrick 1, Bennet 0 Sanders +8
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 30, Buttigieg 23, Klobuchar 14, Warren 11, Biden 10, Yang 4, Gabbard 2, Steyer 2, Patrick 1, Bennet 1 Sanders +7
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary UMass Lowell Sanders 25, Buttigieg 17, Klobuchar 8, Warren 15, Biden 14, Yang 3, Gabbard 4, Steyer 5, Patrick 1, Bennet 1 Sanders +8
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Quinnipiac Biden 17, Sanders 25, Warren 14, Bloomberg 15, Buttigieg 10, Klobuchar 4, Yang 2, Gabbard 1, Steyer 1, Bennet 0, Patrick 0 Sanders +8
General Election: Trump vs. Biden Quinnipiac Biden 50, Trump 43 Biden +7
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders Quinnipiac Sanders 51, Trump 43 Sanders +8
General Election: Trump vs. Warren Quinnipiac Warren 48, Trump 44 Warren +4
General Election: Trump vs. Bloomberg Quinnipiac Bloomberg 51, Trump 42 Bloomberg +9
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg Quinnipiac Buttigieg 47, Trump 43 Buttigieg +4
General Election: Trump vs. Klobuchar Quinnipiac Klobuchar 49, Trump 43 Klobuchar +6
Sunday, February 9
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary CNN/UNH Sanders 28, Buttigieg 21, Klobuchar 6, Warren 9, Biden 12, Yang 4, Gabbard 5, Steyer 2, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +7
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Herald/FPU Sanders 23, Buttigieg 20, Klobuchar 6, Warren 16, Biden 14, Yang 3, Gabbard 0, Steyer 2, Patrick 0, Bennet 1 Sanders +3
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 24, Buttigieg 22, Klobuchar 9, Warren 13, Biden 10, Yang 3, Gabbard 2, Steyer 2, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +2
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 30, Buttigieg 20, Klobuchar 13, Warren 12, Biden 11, Yang 4, Gabbard 3, Steyer 2, Patrick 1, Bennet 0 Sanders +10
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary CBS News/YouGov Sanders 29, Buttigieg 25, Klobuchar 10, Warren 17, Biden 12, Yang 1, Gabbard 2, Steyer 1, Patrick 1, Bennet 0 Sanders +4
Saturday, February 8
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary CNN/UNH Sanders 28, Buttigieg 21, Klobuchar 5, Warren 9, Biden 11, Yang 3, Gabbard 6, Steyer 3, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +7
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 24, Buttigieg 25, Klobuchar 6, Warren 14, Biden 11, Yang 3, Gabbard 2, Steyer 2, Patrick 0, Bennet 1 Buttigieg +1
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 31, Buttigieg 24, Klobuchar 9, Warren 11, Biden 11, Yang 3, Gabbard 5, Steyer 2, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +7
Friday, February 7
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary NBC News/Marist Sanders 25, Buttigieg 21, Klobuchar 8, Warren 14, Biden 13, Yang 4, Gabbard 3, Steyer 4, Patrick 1, Bennet 1 Sanders +4
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 24, Buttigieg 23, Klobuchar 6, Warren 13, Biden 11, Yang 3, Gabbard 4, Steyer 3, Patrick 1, Bennet 1 Sanders +1
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 32, Buttigieg 23, Klobuchar 9, Warren 13, Biden 11, Yang 2, Gabbard 6, Steyer 2, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +9
Thursday, February 6
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Monmouth Sanders 24, Buttigieg 20, Klobuchar 9, Warren 13, Biden 17, Yang 4, Gabbard 4, Steyer 3, Patrick 0, Bennet 1 Sanders +4
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 25, Buttigieg 19, Klobuchar 6, Warren 11, Biden 12, Yang 2, Gabbard 5, Steyer 4, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +6
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 31, Buttigieg 21, Klobuchar 11, Warren 12, Biden 12, Yang 5, Gabbard 5, Steyer 1, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +10
South Carolina Democratic Presidential Primary East Carolina U. Biden 37, Steyer 19, Sanders 14, Warren 8, Buttigieg 4, Yang 3, Gabbard 2, Klobuchar 2, Bloomberg 1 Biden +18
North Carolina Democratic Presidential Primary PPP (D) Biden 25, Sanders 16, Bloomberg 14, Warren 12, Buttigieg 9, Klobuchar 5, Yang 5, Steyer 2, Gabbard Biden +9
Tennessee: Trump vs. Biden Mason-Dixon Trump 55, Biden 39 Trump +16
Tennessee: Trump vs. Sanders Mason-Dixon Trump 57, Sanders 37 Trump +20
Tennessee: Trump vs. Warren Mason-Dixon Trump 57, Warren 36 Trump +21
Tennessee: Trump vs. Buttigieg Mason-Dixon Trump 55, Buttigieg 38 Trump +17
Tennessee: Trump vs. Bloomberg Mason-Dixon Trump 54, Bloomberg 39 Trump +15
Wednesday, February 5
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 24, Buttigieg 15, Klobuchar 6, Warren 10, Biden 15, Yang 3, Gabbard 5, Steyer 5, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +9
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 32, Buttigieg 17, Klobuchar 11, Warren 11, Biden 13, Yang 6, Gabbard 6, Steyer 2, Patrick 1, Bennet 0 Sanders +15
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Economist/YouGov Biden 24, Sanders 19, Warren 18, Bloomberg 9, Buttigieg 9, Klobuchar 6, Yang 3, Gabbard 3, Steyer 2, Bennet 1, Patrick 0 Biden +5
Tuesday, February 4
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary St. Anselm Sanders 19, Buttigieg 14, Klobuchar 11, Warren 11, Biden 19, Yang 4, Gabbard 3, Steyer 5, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Tie
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WCVB/UMass Amherst Sanders 25, Buttigieg 12, Klobuchar 5, Warren 17, Biden 20, Yang 4, Gabbard 5, Steyer 5, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +5
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Globe/Suffolk Sanders 24, Buttigieg 11, Klobuchar 6, Warren 13, Biden 18, Yang 3, Gabbard 5, Steyer 4, Patrick 1, Bennet 1 Sanders +6
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 32, Buttigieg 12, Klobuchar 12, Warren 13, Biden 13, Yang 5, Gabbard 4, Steyer 5, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +19
Monday, February 3
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary Boston Herald/FPU Sanders 31, Buttigieg 8, Klobuchar 4, Warren 17, Biden 24, Yang 1, Gabbard 3, Steyer 0, Patrick 0, Bennet 1 Sanders +7
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary UMass Lowell Sanders 23, Buttigieg 12, Klobuchar 6, Warren 19, Biden 22, Yang 2, Gabbard 5, Steyer 6, Patrick, Bennet 0 Sanders +1
New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Primary WHDH/Emerson Sanders 29, Buttigieg 13, Klobuchar 8, Warren 12, Biden 14, Yang 7, Gabbard 7, Steyer 8, Patrick 0, Bennet 0 Sanders +15
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Morning Consult Biden 28, Sanders 24, Warren 14, Bloomberg 14, Buttigieg 6, Klobuchar 3, Yang 4, Gabbard 2, Steyer 3, Bennet 1, Patrick 1 Biden +4
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination Harvard-Harris Biden 31, Sanders 20, Warren 12, Bloomberg 13, Buttigieg 6, Klobuchar 3, Yang 3, Gabbard 1, Steyer 2, Bennet, Patrick Biden +11
Sunday, February 2
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus Emerson Sanders 28, Biden 21, Buttigieg 15, Warren 14, Klobuchar 11, Yang 5, Steyer 4, Gabbard 1, Bloomberg Sanders +7
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus DFP/Civiqs Sanders 28, Biden 15, Buttigieg 15, Warren 21, Klobuchar 8, Yang 5, Steyer 2, Gabbard 2, Bloomberg Sanders +7
Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus FRA/David Binder (D) Sanders 17, Biden 15, Buttigieg 19, Warren 15, Klobuchar 11, Yang 1, Steyer 3, Gabbard 3, Bloomberg 1 Buttigieg +2
South Carolina Democratic Presidential Primary Post and Courier Biden 25, Steyer 18, Sanders 20, Warren 11, Buttigieg 7, Yang 3, Gabbard 3, Klobuchar 2, Bloomberg Biden +5
General Election: Trump vs. Biden NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Biden 50, Trump 44 Biden +6
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Sanders 49, Trump 45 Sanders +4
General Election: Trump vs. Warren NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Warren 48, Trump 45 Warren +3
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Buttigieg 46, Trump 45 Buttigieg +1
Friday, January 31
Race/Topic   (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Biden 26, Sanders 27, Warren 15, Bloomberg 9, Buttigieg 7, Klobuchar 5, Yang 4, Gabbard 2, Steyer 2, Bennet 0, Patrick 1 Sanders +1
2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination IBD/TIPP Biden 26, Sanders 19, Warren 13, Bloomberg 8, Buttigieg 7, Klobuchar 3, Yang 4, Gabbard 1, Steyer 2, Bennet 1, Patrick 0 Biden +7
Washington Democratic Primary KING-TV/SurveyUSA Sanders 26, Biden 21, Warren 16, Bloomberg 12, Buttigieg 8, Yang 4, Klobuchar 3, Steyer 2 Sanders +5
General Election: Trump vs. Biden IBD/TIPP Biden 49, Trump 48 Biden +1
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders IBD/TIPP Sanders 47, Trump 49 Trump +2
General Election: Trump vs. Warren IBD/TIPP Warren 46, Trump 50 Trump +4
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg IBD/TIPP Buttigieg 45, Trump 48 Trump +3
General Election: Trump vs. Bloomberg IBD/TIPP Bloomberg 48, Trump 47 Bloomberg +1

 

February 10, 2020 – Sanders Takes Top Spot In Dem Primary As Biden Falls, Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Bloomberg Rises In Primary, Runs Strong Against Trump Quinnipiac University Polling Logo

PDF format
Trend Information
Sample and Methodology detail

In the wake of the Iowa caucuses and heading into the New Hampshire primary, there is a dramatic shift in the Democratic primary race for president as Senator Bernie Sanders claims frontrunner status for the first time, overtaking former Vice President Joe Biden, according to a Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pea-ack) University national poll released today. Sanders gets 25 percent of the vote among Democratic voters and independent voters who lean Democratic, while Biden gets 17 percent, former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg receives 15 percent, Senator Elizabeth Warren gets 14 percent, former South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg receives 10 percent, and Senator Amy Klobuchar gets 4 percent. No other candidate tops 2 percent.

In a January 28th poll, prior to the Iowa caucuses, Biden had a modest lead with 26 percent of the vote while Sanders got 21 percent, Warren had 15 percent, Bloomberg received 8 percent, Klobuchar got 7 percent, and Buttigieg received 6 percent.

“Biden scrambles to bounce back in frigid New Hampshire after an icy slide to 17 percent, his lowest national number,” said Quinnipiac University Poll Analyst Tim Malloy.

“Is the Bloomberg camp prepping the white horse for him to ride to the rescue? Maybe not yet, but without setting foot in Iowa or New Hampshire, he is suddenly a looming shadow over the primary field,” Malloy added.

Among moderate and conservative Democrats and Democratic leaners, there is now a close race for the top spot. This group had favored Biden by a wide margin, but his challengers are making inroads. Today, Biden receives 22 percent, Bloomberg gets 21 percent, Sanders gets 17 percent, and Buttigieg receives 12 percent.

Biden no longer dominates on the key question of electability, as 27 percent say Biden has the best chance of winning against Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election, while 24 percent say Sanders, 17 percent say Bloomberg, and 9 percent say Buttigieg. In the January 28th poll, Biden led on this question with 44 percent, followed by Sanders at 19 percent and Bloomberg at 9 percent.

“Clearly Biden’s fourth place finish in Iowa has hurt the perception of what was his biggest strength – electability,” Malloy said.

THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:

  • Bloomberg tops Trump 51 – 42 percent;
  • Sanders defeats Trump 51 – 43 percent;
  • Biden beats Trump 50 – 43 percent;
  • Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 – 43 percent;
  • Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 – 44 percent;
  • Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 – 43 percent.

President Trump’s favorability rating is underwater, as 42 percent of registered voters have a favorable opinion of him, while 55 percent have an unfavorable view of him. However, it is his best favorability rating since a March 7th, 2017 poll, when his favorability rating was a negative 43 – 53 percent.

Like President Trump, the top four Democratic candidates in the primary are viewed more unfavorably than favorably. Warren has the worst net score (favorable minus unfavorable) among all registered voters, with Biden close behind. Biden’s favorability numbers have been declining over the last year since his positive 53 – 33 percent favorability rating in a December 19th, 2018 poll. In today’s poll:

  • Warren gets a negative 39 – 47 percent favorability rating;
  • Biden gets a negative 43 – 50 percent;
  • Bloomberg gets a negative 34 – 40 percent, with 25 percent who haven’t heard enough about him;
  • Sanders gets a negative 44 – 49 percent;
  • Buttigieg gets a positive 36 – 32 percent, and 31 percent haven’t heard enough about him;
  • Klobuchar gets a positive 32 – 22 percent, with 44 percent who haven’t heard enough about her.

TRUMP JOB APPROVAL

Less than a week after President Trump was acquitted in the Senate impeachment trial and delivered his State of the Union address, the president’s job approval continues to match his highest approval number, with 43 percent of voters saying they approve of the job President Trump is doing and 53 percent saying they disapprove. This remains essentially unchanged since mid-December 2019. Broken down along party lines, Republicans approve 89 – 9 percent, Democrats disapprove 94 – 4 percent, and independents are split with 46 percent approving and 50 percent disapproving.

Looking at how President Trump compares to his two predecessors at the same point in their re-election years, voters gave President Obama a slightly negative 45 – 49 percent job approval rating in February of 2012, and President Bush a slightly positive 48 – 45 percent job approval rating in February of 2004. Unlike President Trump, though, both presidents had hit higher approval ratings in their previous years in office. President Obama had hit a high of 59 percent approval in 2009, and President Bush received a high of 83 percent approval in 2001.

“Fresh from acquittal by the Senate, feistily throwing haymakers in every direction, the president presumably has a strong economy to ride all the way to Election Day. The Democrats are facing a reinvigorated and formidable Trump,” added Malloy.

THE ECONOMY

President Trump continues to score high marks on his handling of the economy. Voters approve 54 – 42 percent of his handling of the economy, compared to his all-time high of 57 – 38 percent on January 13th, 2020. Republicans approve 97 – 3 percent, Democrats disapprove 81 – 15 percent, and independents approve 59 – 37 percent.

When asked about their personal financial situations, voters say 59 – 20 percent that they are better off financially than they were in 2016, the last presidential election year, while 19 percent say their financial situation is the same. This compares to a December 10th, 2019 survey that found 57 percent were better off, 22 percent were worse off, and 19 percent were the same.

Overall, 70 percent of voters describe the nation’s economy as excellent or good and 29 percent describe it as not so good or poor. That is just slightly lower than the all-time high set on December 16th, 2019, when 73 percent said excellent or good and 25 percent said not so good or poor.

POST-IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

American voters are evenly split, 49 – 49 percent, on the Senate’s decision to acquit President Trump of both articles of impeachment. Republicans approve 95 – 4 percent, independents approve 53 – 45 percent, and Democrats disapprove 90 – 8 percent.

Despite the acquittal, voters say 55 – 40 percent that the Senate voting to acquit President Trump does not clear him of any wrongdoing in the Ukraine matter. Republicans say 81 – 12 percent that the acquittal clears the president of wrongdoing, while Democrats 91 – 6 percent and independents 54 – 40 percent say it does not. By 51 – 46 percent, voters say the charges against President Trump were serious enough for him to be impeached and put on trial.

Voters say 59 – 35 percent that the Senate impeachment trial was conducted unfairly.

From February 5 – 9, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,519 self-identified registered voters nationwide with a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percentage points. The survey includes 665 Democratic voters and independent voters who lean Democratic with a margin of error of +/- 3.8 percentage points.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts gold standard surveys using random digit dialing with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones. The Quinnipiac University Poll conducts nationwide surveys and polls in more than a dozen states on national and statewide elections, as well as public policy issues.

Visit poll.qu.edu or http://www.facebook.com/quinnipiacpoll

Email poll@qu.edu, or follow us on Twitter @QuinnipiacPoll.

1. How much attention have you been paying to the election campaign for president; a lot, some, only a little, or none at all?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
A lot                54%    59%    61%    45%    53%    55%    60%    51%
Some                 28     25     26     35     29     28     27     30
Only a little        12     11      8     15     11     13      9     12
None at all           5      4      5      5      7      4      4      6
DK/NA                 -      1      -      -      -      1      -      -
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
A lot                36%    49%    60%    66%    54%    57%    56%    51%    50%
Some                 37     36     25     18     30     27     28     33     22
Only a little        18     10     11     11      9     12     10     12     22
None at all           9      5      3      5      7      4      5      4      6
DK/NA                 -      -      1      1      -      -      -      1      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
A lot                59%    77%    55%    53%    58%    59%    64%    49%    69%    57%
Some                 28     18     33     31     29     28     25     36     23     28
Only a little         8      5      9      9      5     10      6     10      6      7
None at all           5      1      3      7      8      3      5      5      2      9
DK/NA                 -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
A lot                61%    50%    43%    56%    60%    69%    60%    59%    60%
Some                 26     36     39     31     29     18     24     28     31
Only a little         8      8     11      6     10      7     11      6      8
None at all           5      6      7      7      1      6      5      8      1
DK/NA                 -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
 

TREND: How much attention have you been paying to the election campaign for president; a lot, some, only a little, or none at all?

                                     OnlyA   None
                     A lot   Some    Little  AtAll   DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         54      28      12       5       - 
Jan 28, 2020         50      28      15       7       1
Jan 13, 2020         51      28      14       8       -
Dec 16, 2019         54      25      14       7       - 
Dec 10, 2019         51      29      15       6       -
Nov 26, 2019         49      29      15       7       1
Oct 24, 2019         51      27      14       7       -
Oct 14, 2019         54      25      11       9       - 
Oct 08, 2019         53      24      15       8       -
Sep 25, 2019         48      25      17       8       1

See additional trend information at top of page

2. (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) If the Democratic primary for president were being held today, and the candidates were: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Buttigieg, Andrew Yang, Michael Bennet, Tom Steyer, Deval Patrick, and Michael Bloomberg, for whom would you vote?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Biden                17%     5%    14%    22%    14%    19%    14%    27%    16%    12%
Sanders              25     44     27     17     32     20     22     19     17     30
Warren               14     27     20      6     10     16     16      8     17     13
Klobuchar             4      1      3      6      5      4      6      -      8      4
Gabbard               1      1      -      1      2      -      -      -      -      -
Buttigieg            10      8     11     12     10     11     14      4     16     10
Yang                  2      -      4      3      3      2      2      1      1      4
Bennet                -      -      -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -
Steyer                1      -      -      1      -      1      1      -      1      1
Patrick               -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
Bloomberg            15      4     12     21     13     16     15     22     16     12
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1      5      -      -      -      2      -      4      -      -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      1      1      -      2      2      1      2      -      -      4
DK/NA                10      5      9     11     10     10      9     13      8     10
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Biden                19%     9%     6%    13%    18%    27%    15%    17%    17%
Sanders              24     26     54     30     11      8     31     26     18
Warren               13     16     15     16     15     12     12     14     17
Klobuchar             4      4      2      4      4      6      2      7      4
Gabbard               1      -      2      1      -      -      1      -      1
Buttigieg             9     17      6     10     16      9     11      9     11
Yang                  3      1      5      2      -      1      2      3      2
Bennet                -      -      -      1      -      -      -      -      1
Steyer                -      2      1      -      1      1      1      1      1
Patrick               -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
Bloomberg            14     17      5     13     18     22     11     18     16
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1      -      -      4      -      -      3      -      -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      1      2      1      1      1      1      1      -      2
DK/NA                10      7      4      5     16     13      9      7      9
 
                     PREFER CANDIDATE Q6
                     Shares Most
                     Views  Elect
 
Biden                14%    18%
Sanders              35     15
Warren                9     18
Klobuchar             1      7
Gabbard               2      -
Buttigieg             7     14
Yang                  3      2
Bennet                -      -
Steyer                1      -
Patrick               -      -
Bloomberg            14     16
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      2      1
DK/NA                 9     10
 

TREND: (If Democrat or Democratic Leaner) If the Democratic primary for president were being held today, and the candidates were: Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Buttigieg, Andrew Yang, Michael Bennet, Tom Steyer, Deval Patrick, and Michael Bloomberg, for whom would you vote? (Trend information is available upon request back through Mar 2019)

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS..........................................
                     Feb 10  Jan 28  Jan 13  Dec 16  Dec 10  Nov 26  Oct 24  Oct 14  Oct 08
                     2020    2020    2020    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019  
                             
Biden                17      26      25      30      29      24      21      27      26    
Sanders              25      21      19      16      17      13      15      11      16    
Warren               14      15      16      17      15      14      28      30      29    
Klobuchar             4       7       4       3       3       3       3       2       2    
Gabbard               1       1       1       1       2       1       1       -       -    
Buttigieg            10       6       8       9       9      16      10       8       4    
Yang                  2       3       5       3       4       2       1       2       3    
Bennet                -       -       1       -       1       2       -       1       1    
Steyer                1       2       1       1       1       -       1       2       -    
Patrick               -       -       1       -       -       -      na      na      na    
Bloomberg            15       8       6       7       5       3      na      na      na    
Delaney              na       -       -       -       1       -       -       -       -    
Booker               na      na       1       2       1       2       1       2       2    
Castro               na      na      na       1       1       2       1       1       1    
Williamson           na      na      na       -       1       -       -       -       -    
Bullock              na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -    
Harris               na      na      na      na      na       3       5       4       3    
Sestak               na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -    
Messam               na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
O'Rourke             na      na      na      na      na      na       1       2       1    
Ryan                 na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       1    
de Blasio            na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
Gillibrand           na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
Gravel               na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
Hickenlooper         na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
Inslee               na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
Moulton              na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
Swalwell             na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na    
SMONE ELSE            1       -       -       -       -       -       1       -       1    
WLDN'T VOTE           1       -       1       -       1       1       1       2       1    
DK/NA                10      11      11      10      11      11       9       8       8    
 
 

2a. (If candidate chosen q2) Is your mind made up, or do you think you might change your mind before the primary?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................
                     CANDIDATE CHOSEN Q2................................
                            CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Tot    Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Made up              42%    46%    60%      30%     28%        25%
Might change         56     54     39       69      70         73
DK/NA                 1      1      1        1       2          2
 

TREND: (If candidate chosen) Is your mind made up, or do you think you might change your mind before the primary?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS
                     CANDIDATE CHOSEN.....
                     MadeUp  Change  DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         42      56       1
Jan 28, 2020         43      55       1
Jan 13, 2020         35      63       1
Dec 16, 2019         38      61       1
Dec 10, 2019         39      59       2
Nov 26, 2019         33      64       3
Sep 25, 2019         34      63       3
 
 

2b. (If candidate chosen q2) Who is your second choice?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................
                            CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Tot    Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Biden                15%     -     20%       8%     19%        33%
Sanders              11     19      -       33      11          4
Warren               16     13     37        -      26          7
Klobuchar             7     10      -        7      26          5
Gabbard               -      -      -        -       1          -
Buttigieg            13     17      7       25       -         21
Yang                  4      -     11        4       5          1
Bennet                -      -      -        -       -          1
Steyer                1      3      2        -       -          3
Patrick               1      -      -        4       -          -
Bloomberg             6     21      4        3       9          -
No first choice      12      -      -        -       -          -
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1      -      -        -       1          4
DK/NA                13     17     18       14       2         21
 

TREND: (If candidate chosen) Who is your second choice?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS..................
                     Feb 10  Jan 28  Jan 13  Dec 16  Dec 10  Nov 26
                     2020    2020    2020    2019    2019    2019
                                                     
Biden                15      15      13      13      13      12
Sanders              11      11      18      14      11      11
Warren               16      17      19      21      16      20
Klobuchar             7       7       3       5       5       4
Gabbard               -       1       1       1       -       1
Buttigieg            13      12       7       9      11      10
Yang                  4       4       2       2       3       2
Bennet                -       -       -       -       -       -
Steyer                1       2       2       1       1       1
Patrick               1       -       1       -       1       -
Bloomberg             6       5       7       6       4       2
Delaney              na       -       -       -       -       -
Booker               na      na       4       3       4       2
Castro               na      na      na       1       -       -
Williamson           na      na      na       -       1       -
Bullock              na      na      na      na      na       -
Harris               na      na      na      na      na       6
Sestak               na      na      na      na      na       -
No first choice      12      12      12      10      12      12
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1       -       1       -       1       -
DK/NA                13      13      11      14      16      16
 
 

3. (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Regardless of how you intend to vote in the Democratic primary for president, which candidate do you think – would be the best leader?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Biden                22%    16%    23%    23%    17%    25%    17%    38%    20%    13%
Sanders              22     37     21     17     28     18     19     16     14     27
Warren               14     27     17      8     10     17     18      7     20     14
Klobuchar             3      2      3      5      4      3      5      1      6      4
Gabbard               1      1      -      1      2      -      -      -      -      -
Buttigieg            10      6     10     12     12      9     13      3     15     11
Yang                  2      1      3      2      4      1      2      1      1      4
Bennet                -      -      1      -      1      -      -      2      -      -
Steyer                1      -      -      1      -      1      1      -      1      1
Patrick               -      1      -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -
Bloomberg            13      3     12     16     14     12     15     12     17     12
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
DK/NA                11      6      9     14      7     14      9     18      6     15
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Biden                24%    15%    12%    20%    23%    30%    20%    25%    18%
Sanders              21     26     49     27     10      6     26     24     16
Warren               14     17     14     20     15      9     12     13     21
Klobuchar             4      3      1      4      4      4      3      5      3
Gabbard               1      -      2      1      -      -      1      -      1
Buttigieg             9     13      8     10     13      8      7     12     13
Yang                  2      1      5      2      -      2      2      2      3
Bennet                1      -      -      1      1      -      1      -      1
Steyer                -      3      1      -      1      1      1      -      1
Patrick               -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -      -
Bloomberg            13     15      6     10     15     20     11     14     14
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
DK/NA                12      8      4      5     17     19     15      6      9
 

TREND: (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Regardless of how you intend to vote in the Democratic primary for president, which candidate do you think would be the best leader? (Trend information is available upon request back through Apr 2019)

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS..........................................
                     Feb 10  Jan 28  Dec 16  Nov 26  Oct 24  Oct 14  Aug 06  Jul 29  Jul 02
                     2020    2020    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019  
                                             
Biden                22      31      32      26      28      32      33      36      26    
Sanders              22      18      14      12      13       9      13      12      15    
Warren               14      17      19      19      24      28      22      17      15    
Klobuchar             3       6       3       3       3       2       1       1       1    
Gabbard               1       1       1       -       -       -       1       -       1    
Buttigieg            10       5       6      12       8       7       5       5       4    
Yang                  2       2       2       2       1       1       1       1       -    
Bennet                -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Steyer                1       1       1       -       -       1       -       -      na    
Patrick               -       -       -       -      na      na      na      na      na    
Bloomberg            13       9       8       3      na      na      na      na      na    
Delaney              na       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Booker               na      na       2       1       1       1       2       1       3    
Castro               na      na       1       -       -       1       1       -       1    
Williamson           na      na       -       -       -       -       -       1       -    
Bullock              na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Harris               na      na      na       4       4       4       7       9      16    
Sestak               na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Messam               na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -    
O'Rourke             na      na      na      na       1       1       1       1       1    
Ryan                 na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -    
de Blasio            na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Gillibrand           na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Gravel               na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Hickenlooper         na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Inslee               na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Moulton              na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Swalwell             na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na       -    
SMONE ELSE            -       -       -       1       1       1       -       -       -    
DK/NA                11      11      12      15      13      11      12      15      15    
 
 

4. (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Regardless of how you intend to vote in the Democratic primary for president, which candidate do you think – has the best policy ideas?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Biden                14%     5%    12%    18%    13%    14%    11%    25%    13%     7%
Sanders              27     45     35     17     31     24     26     23     21     34
Warren               16     31     22      9     14     18     20     11     24     13
Klobuchar             4      -      4      6      5      4      7      1      7      5
Gabbard               1      1      -      1      2      -      -      -      -      -
Buttigieg             9      6      7     11     10      8     12      3     14      9
Yang                  4      1      5      5      6      3      3      3      2      4
Bennet                -      -      -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -
Steyer                1      2      1      1      1      2      1      2      2      1
Patrick               -      -      1      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
Bloomberg            10      6      7     13      9     12      9     17      9     10
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      1      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      1
DK/NA                13      3      7     18      9     15     10     15      7     16
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Biden                14%    14%     6%    11%    15%    20%    10%    17%    11%
Sanders              28     25     50     33     18     10     32     29     22
Warren               16     17     15     19     18     13     11     15     24
Klobuchar             4      6      1      3      6      7      2      7      5
Gabbard               1      -      2      1      -      -      1      -      1
Buttigieg             8     11      5      8     11      9      9      7     11
Yang                  4      6      7      5      2      2      4      4      5
Bennet                -      -      -      1      -      -      -      -      1
Steyer                1      2      1      1      3      1      3      1      1
Patrick               -      -      1      -      -      -      -      -      1
Bloomberg            11      9      5      7     12     17     12     10      9
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      1      -      -      -      1      1      -      -
DK/NA                14      8      8     11     14     19     16     10      8
 

TREND: (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Regardless of how you intend to vote in the Democratic primary for president, which candidate do you think has the best policy ideas? (Trend information is available upon request back through Apr 2019)

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS..........................................
                     Feb 10  Jan 28  Dec 16  Nov 26  Oct 24  Oct 14  Aug 06  Jul 29  Jul 02
                     2020    2020    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019  
                             
Biden                14      18      23      15      15      16      17      21      11    
Sanders              27      22      19      15      20      12      16      16      18    
Warren               16      21      19      23      30      40      32      26      31    
Klobuchar             4       6       3       4       3       2       1       1       1    
Gabbard               1       -       1       -       -       -       1       1       1    
Buttigieg             9       6       8      14       9       6       5       5       3    
Yang                  4       3       4       3       2       2       1       2       -    
Bennet                -       -       -       1       -       -       -       -       -    
Steyer                1       2       1       1       -       1       -       -      na    
Patrick               -       -       -       -      na      na      na      na      na    
Bloomberg            10       6       4       -      na      na      na      na      na    
Delaney              na       -       -       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Booker               na      na       2       -       1       1       1       1       2    
Castro               na      na       1       1       -       -       -       1       1    
Williamson           na      na       -       -       -       -       -       1       -    
Bullock              na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Harris               na      na      na       2       4       1       5       6       8    
Sestak               na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Messam               na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -    
O'Rourke             na      na      na      na       1       2       1       1       -    
Ryan                 na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -    
de Blasio            na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Gillibrand           na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Gravel               na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Hickenlooper         na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Inslee               na      na      na      na      na      na       1       -       -    
Moulton              na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Swalwell             na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na       -    
SMONE ELSE            -       -       -       1       1       -       -       -       -    
DK/NA                13      16      16      19      13      16      17      20      22    
 
 

5. (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Regardless of how you intend to vote in the Democratic primary for president, which candidate do you think – has the best chance of winning against Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Biden                27%    22%    32%    26%    24%    28%    23%    40%    22%    24%
Sanders              24     48     19     18     35     17     24     14     20     30
Warren                5      9      5      4      4      6      6      2      7      5
Klobuchar             1      1      3      1      1      2      2      -      3      1
Gabbard               -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
Buttigieg             9      8      6     11      8     10     11      4     12      9
Yang                  1      -      1      1      2      -      -      1      -      -
Bennet                -      -      -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -
Steyer                -      -      -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -
Patrick               -      1      -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -
Bloomberg            17      3     17     22     15     18     17     25     20     12
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      -      1      -      -      1      1      -      1      1
DK/NA                15      8     17     17     12     18     16     11     15     18
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Biden                29%    16%    22%    23%    26%    30%    27%    27%    23%
Sanders              23     28     56     27     14      8     29     23     22
Warren                4      9      4      3      6      7      5      5      6
Klobuchar             1      3      1      2      -      2      1      2      1
Gabbard               -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -      -
Buttigieg             8     10      7     11     12      5      9      8     10
Yang                  1      2      1      2      -      1      1      -      1
Bennet                -      -      -      1      -      -      -      -      1
Steyer                -      -      -      -      1      -      -      -      -
Patrick               -      -      -      -      -      1      -      -      -
Bloomberg            17     16      4     18     23     22     12     19     21
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      -      -      1      -      1      -      1      1
DK/NA                15     17      5     13     19     23     15     13     13
 

TREND: (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Regardless of how you intend to vote in the Democratic primary for president, which candidate do you think has the best chance of winning against Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential election? (Trend information is available upon request back through Apr 2019)

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS..........................................
                     Feb 10  Jan 28  Dec 16  Nov 26  Oct 24  Oct 14  Aug 06  Jul 29  Jul 02
                     2020    2020    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019    2019  
                                             
Biden                27      44      44      46      42      48      49      51      42    
Sanders              24      19      15      10      14       7      12      10      13    
Warren                5       7       9      10      20      21       9       8       9    
Klobuchar             1       2       1       1       1       -       -       -       -    
Gabbard               -       -       1       1       -       -       -       -       1    
Buttigieg             9       2       3       6       2       2       1       1       1    
Yang                  1       1       1       1       -       -       1       -       -    
Bennet                -       -       -       1       -       -       -       -       -    
Steyer                -       1       -       -       1       1       -       -      na    
Patrick               -       -       -       -      na      na      na      na      na    
Bloomberg            17       9       7       3      na      na      na      na      na    
Delaney              na       -       -       -       -       -       -       1       -    
Booker               na      na       -       -       1       1       1       1       1    
Castro               na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Williamson           na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Bullock              na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Harris               na      na      na       1       3       1       6       8      14    
Sestak               na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -       -    
Messam               na      na      na      na       -       -       -       -       -    
O'Rourke             na      na      na      na       -       1       2       -       -    
Ryan                 na      na      na      na       -       -       1       -       -    
de Blasio            na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Gillibrand           na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Gravel               na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Hickenlooper         na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Inslee               na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Moulton              na      na      na      na      na      na       -       -       -    
Swalwell             na      na      na      na      na      na      na      na       -    
SMONE ELSE            -       -       -       -       1       -       1       -       -    
DK/NA                15      16      19      20      15      16      17      20      17    
 
 

6. (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Thinking about the 2020 Democratic primary for president, if all other things are equal, would you prefer a candidate that most shares your views on issues or a candidate that you think is the most electable?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Shares views         46%    49%    49%    43%    47%    45%    37%    62%    32%    47%
Most electable       49     44     49     53     48     50     59     31     65     47
DOESN'T MATTER(VOL)   1      1      1      1      -      1      1      1      1      1
DK/NA                 4      6      -      3      5      3      3      5      2      5
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Shares views         46%    46%    68%    50%    40%    28%    56%    44%    39%
Most electable       50     49     28     44     55     68     40     51     59
DOESN'T MATTER(VOL)   1      -      -      2      -      1      1      1      -
DK/NA                 4      4      4      4      5      3      3      4      2
 

TREND: (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Thinking about the 2020 Democratic primary for president, if all other things are equal, would you prefer a candidate that most shares your views on issues or a candidate that you think is the most electable?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS..
                     Shares  Most    DOESN'T
                     views   elect   MATTER  DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         46      49       1       4
Aug 06, 2019         46      50       1       3
Mar 28, 2019         51      45       1       3
 
 

7. (If Democrat or Democratic leaner) Do you think Iowa should continue to be the first state in the nation to vote in the presidential nomination process, or don’t you think so?

                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Yes/Should continue  17%    14%    14%    20%    18%    16%    16%    17%    12%    22%
No                   64     71     66     61     67     62     65     68     68     59
DK/NA                19     15     20     19     15     22     20     15     20     18
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Yes/Should continue  16%    19%    30%    14%    14%    12%    19%    20%    12%
No                   65     61     59     65     70     64     67     58     67
DK/NA                19     20     11     21     16     24     14     21     21
 
 

8. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Joe Biden the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Biden                50%     6%    92%    48%    43%    57%    54%    33%
Trump                43     92      4     41     49     37     40     60
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      -      -      3      2      2      2      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      -      3      5      3      3      2      3
DK/NA                 2      2      1      2      2      1      2      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Biden                55%    52%    43%    54%    39%    48%    44%    81%    62%
Trump                32     39     52     44     56     45     50     12     29
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       5      2      1      -      1      3      2      2      1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      5      4      3      -      3      2      2      4      3
DK/NA                 3      2      1      1      2      2      2      1      4
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS................
                     CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Biden                99%    85%      94%     99%        96%
Trump                 1      3        -       1          2
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      1        -       -          1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      -     10        6       1          -
DK/NA                 -      1        -       -          1
 

TREND: If the election for President were being held today, and the candidates were Joe Biden the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                     SMONE   WLD'T
                     Biden   Trump   ELSE    VOTE    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         50      43       2       3       2
Dec 10, 2019         51      42       2       2       3
Oct 08, 2019         51      40       2       3       4
Aug 28, 2019         54      38       1       2       4
Jun 11, 2019         53      40       1       2       4
Sep 24, 2015         51      40       1       4       4
Aug 27, 2015         48      40       2       5       5
Jul 30, 2015         49      37       3       6       5
 
 

9. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Bernie Sanders the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Sanders              51%     4%    93%    48%    45%    57%    52%    35%
Trump                43     92      4     43     50     38     41     61
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       1      -      -      2      1      1      2      -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      2      1      2      2      2      1      2      1
DK/NA                 3      2      1      4      2      3      2      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Sanders              64%    53%    43%    50%    38%    49%    44%    85%    64%
Trump                31     41     53     44     56     46     51     10     31
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      1      1      1      1      1      1      1      -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      1      2      1      2      2      1      2      1      1
DK/NA                 3      3      2      2      2      2      2      3      4
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS................
                     CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Sanders              92%    100%     98%     97%        83%
Trump                 1       -       -       -         10
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -       -       -       -          2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3       -       2       3          2
DK/NA                 4       -       -       -          3
 

TREND: If the election for President were being held today, and the candidates were Bernie Sanders the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                     SMONE   WLD'T
                     Sanders Trump   ELSE    VOTE    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         51      43       1       2       3
Dec 10, 2019         51      43       2       2       3
Oct 08, 2019         49      42       2       3       4
Aug 28, 2019         53      39       1       3       4
Jun 11, 2019         51      42       1       2       4
Jun 01, 2016         48      39       3       6       5
Mar 23, 2016         52      38       2       5       3
Feb 18, 2016         48      42       2       5       4
Feb 05, 2016         49      39       2       6       5
Dec 22, 2015         51      38       1       6       4

See additional trend information at top of page

10. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Elizabeth Warren the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Warren               48%     4%    94%    41%    40%    56%    52%    31%
Trump                44     92      4     46     53     36     41     62
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      1      -      2      2      2      2      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      2      -      1      6      2      3      2      3
DK/NA                 3      3      1      5      3      3      3      3
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Warren               53%    49%    42%    51%    35%    47%    41%    85%    56%
Trump                34     42     53     45     60     44     51     10     35
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       5      1      1      2      1      3      2      -      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      4      2      2      1      2      3      2      3      2
DK/NA                 4      5      2      1      3      3      3      3      5
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS................
                     CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Warren               93%    94%      100%    98%        89%
Trump                 1      2         -      -          6
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      1         -      -          2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      -      1         -      2          2
DK/NA                 6      1         -      -          2
 

TREND: If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Elizabeth Warren the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                     SMONE   WLD'T
                     Warren  Trump   ELSE    VOTE    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         48      44       2       2       3
Dec 10, 2019         50      43       2       2       3
Oct 08, 2019         49      41       2       3       4
Aug 28, 2019         52      40       1       3       4
Jun 11, 2019         49      42       1       3       5
 
 

11. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Pete Buttigieg the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Buttigieg            47%     6%    88%    43%    37%    57%    56%    33%
Trump                43     90      6     42     52     36     38     61
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      1      -      2      3      1      1      1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      -      3      4      4      1      1      1
DK/NA                 5      3      2      9      5      5      3      4
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Buttigieg            49%    48%    42%    52%    37%    51%    44%    72%    48%
Trump                40     37     52     43     57     44     50     13     34
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       3      2      1      1      1      1      1      3      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      5      2      1      2      1      1      5      4
DK/NA                 5      8      3      4      3      4      4      7     11
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS................                     
                     CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Buttigieg            87%    82%      96%     100%       87%
Trump                 3      9        1        -         7
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      2        -        -         1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      4      6        3        -         1
DK/NA                 4      1        -        -         5
 

TREND: If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Pete Buttigieg the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                     Butti-          SMONE   WLD'T
                     gieg    Trump   ELSE    VOTE    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         47      43       2       3       5
Dec 10, 2019         48      43       2       2       4
Aug 28, 2019         49      40       2       3       7
Jun 11, 2019         47      42       1       3       7
 
 

12. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Amy Klobuchar the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Klobuchar            49%     6%    92%    43%    40%    57%    55%    33%
Trump                43     91      5     42     51     36     40     60
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      -      -      3      2      2      1      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      2      1      1      5      3      1      1      1
DK/NA                 4      2      2      7      4      4      3      4
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Klobuchar            51%    50%    43%    52%    38%    49%    44%    80%    57%
Trump                35     39     52     44     57     44     50     13     31
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       5      1      1      1      1      2      2      1      2
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      4      1      -      2      1      1      2      4
DK/NA                 6      6      3      3      3      4      4      4      6
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS................
                     CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Klobuchar            97%    87%      97%     99%        90%
Trump                 -      6        -       -          6
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      1        -       -          1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      1      5        -       1          -
DK/NA                 2      1        3       -          4
 

TREND: If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Amy Klobuchar the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                     Klobu-          SMONE   WLD'T
                     char    Trump   ELSE    VOTE    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         49      43       2       2       4
Dec 10, 2019         47      43       2       2       5
 
 

13. If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Michael Bloomberg the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Bloomberg            51%     6%    92%    48%    42%    59%    56%    36%
Trump                42     90      3     41     49     35     39     59
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       2      -      -      2      2      1      1      1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      1      3      4      3      2      2      2
DK/NA                 3      3      1      5      4      2      3      3
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Bloomberg            56%    52%    45%    53%    39%    52%    46%    86%    53%
Trump                32     38     50     44     55     44     49      7     34
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       4      1      -      1      1      1      1      -      4
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      3      4      3      -      2      1      2      6      3
DK/NA                 4      5      2      2      3      2      3      2      6
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS................
                     CANDIDATE OF CHOICE Q2......................
                     Biden  Sanders  Warren  Buttigieg  Bloomberg
 
Bloomberg            97%    85%      95%     96%        100%
Trump                 1      4        1       1           -
SMONE ELSE(VOL)       -      2        1       -           -
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)      2      7        3       3           -
DK/NA                 1      2        -       -           -
 

TREND: If the election for president were being held today, and the candidates were Michael Bloomberg the Democrat and Donald Trump the Republican, for whom would you vote?

                     Bloom-          SMONE   WLD'T
                     berg    Trump   ELSE    VOTE    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         51      42       2       3       3
Dec 10, 2019         48      42       2       3       5
 
 

14. Is your opinion of Joe Biden favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            43%    10%    75%    43%    37%    48%    47%    30%
Unfavorable          50     84     21     49     54     46     48     63
Hvn't hrd enough      5      4      3      7      6      5      4      5
REFUSED               2      2      1      2      3      1      1      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            34%    49%    38%    50%    35%    42%    39%    72%    45%
Unfavorable          52     45     56     44     59     52     56     20     46
Hvn't hrd enough     11      4      4      4      5      4      4      7      9
REFUSED               3      2      1      2      1      2      2      2      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            75%    63%    76%    80%    69%    79%    76%    82%    79%    73%
Unfavorable          21     36     22     15     27     17     20     11     19     23
Hvn't hrd enough      3      1      2      5      4      3      2      7      2      3
REFUSED               1      -      -      1      -      1      1      1      -      2
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            75%    75%    48%    81%    79%    89%    70%    76%    77%
Unfavorable          21     20     46     17     16      8     26     19     21
Hvn't hrd enough      3      5      6      2      4      2      3      5      2
REFUSED               1      -      -      -      1      1      1      -      1
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Joe Biden favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hvn't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         43      50       5       2
Dec 10, 2019         44      47       7       2
Oct 14, 2019         41      43      14       3
Sep 25, 2019         45      45       9       2
May 21, 2019         49      39      11       2
Dec 19, 2018         53      33      12       2 
Jan 17, 2018         53      29      17       1 
Sep 24, 2015         50      34      14       1
Aug 27, 2015         48      39      11       1
Jul 30, 2015         49      39      10       2

See additional trend information at top of page, including Democratic/Democratic leaner trends

15. Is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            44%     8%    76%    44%    43%    46%    41%    32%
Unfavorable          49     88     18     50     51     47     54     62
Hvn't hrd enough      5      4      5      4      4      6      3      5
REFUSED               1      1      1      2      1      1      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            60%    48%    34%    39%    35%    38%    37%    71%    63%
Unfavorable          34     45     60     51     60     56     58     20     26
Hvn't hrd enough      5      6      4      8      4      5      4      6     10
REFUSED               -      1      2      1      1      1      1      2      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            76%    91%    79%    68%    79%    74%    71%    80%    70%    73%
Unfavorable          18      9     13     25     15     20     23     12     25     20
Hvn't hrd enough      5      1      5      6      4      5      4      5      3      5
REFUSED               2      -      2      2      2      1      1      3      1      1
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            76%    74%    85%    78%    69%    72%    77%    78%    70%
Unfavorable          18     19     11     18     24     19     13     20     24
Hvn't hrd enough      5      3      2      4      3      8      8      1      4
REFUSED               1      4      1      -      4      1      2      1      2
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Bernie Sanders favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hvn't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         44      49       5       1
Dec 10, 2019         44      48       7       1
Oct 14, 2019         39      47      12       2
Sep 25, 2019         40      51       8       2
May 21, 2019         41      48       8       3
Dec 19, 2018         44      42      12       3
Jan 17, 2018         48      38      13       1
Mar 23, 2016         50      37      12       1
Feb 18, 2016         51      36      12       1 
Feb 05, 2016         44      35      19       2

See additional trend information at top of page, including Democratic/Democratic leaner trends

16. Is your opinion of Elizabeth Warren favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about her?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            39%     4%    77%    33%    34%    43%    44%    26%
Unfavorable          47     84     13     49     53     41     48     58
Hvn't hrd enough     13     11     10     16     11     15      8     15
REFUSED               1      1      -      2      1      -      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            45%    39%    36%    40%    31%    38%    35%    65%    40%
Unfavorable          41     43     53     48     59     48     53     16     39
Hvn't hrd enough     14     17     11     11     10     13     12     17     21
REFUSED               -      1      1      1      1      1      1      2      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            74%    87%    75%    70%    75%    74%    76%    73%    78%    73%
Unfavorable          14     10     15     16     14     14     15      8     17     13
Hvn't hrd enough     11      3      9     14     10     12      8     17      4     15
REFUSED               -      -      1      -      1      -      -      1      -      -
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            77%    64%    82%    71%    78%    75%    75%    75%    73%
Unfavorable          13     17     13     13     12     12      9     17     19
Hvn't hrd enough     10     18      5     17      8     12     15      8      8
REFUSED               -      2      -      -      2      -      -      -      -
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Elizabeth Warren favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about her?

                                     Hvn't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         39      47      13       1 
Dec 10, 2019         38      45      16       1
Oct 14, 2019         36      39      23       2
Sep 25, 2019         39      41      19       1 
May 21, 2019         32      41      25       2
Dec 19, 2018         30      37      31       2
Jul 08, 2014         24      15      61       -
Dec 11, 2013         17      19      63       1 
See Democratic/Democratic leaner trends in additional trend information at top of page 
 
 
                  
 
 

17. Is your opinion of Pete Buttigieg favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            36%    10%    59%    38%    33%    39%    49%    27%
Unfavorable          32     56     13     29     39     26     30     38
Hvn't hrd enough     31     34     26     32     27     34     20     34
REFUSED               1      1      2      1      1      1      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            32%    37%    37%    39%    36%    40%    38%    38%    27%
Unfavorable          31     29     34     34     39     29     34     16     27
Hvn't hrd enough     36     34     28     26     24     30     27     42     46
REFUSED               1      1      2      1      1      1      1      3      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            60%    62%    62%    60%    60%    60%    71%    42%    77%    61%
Unfavorable          13     30      7     10     18     10     11     13     11     11
Hvn't hrd enough     26      8     28     29     21     28     18     42     12     28
REFUSED               1      1      2      1      1      2      1      4      1      -
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            59%    64%    47%    57%    68%    66%    53%    57%    71%
Unfavorable          13     13     30     15      6      6     16     13     13
Hvn't hrd enough     26     23     23     27     23     27     31     30     13
REFUSED               2      -      -      1      3      1      -      1      3
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Pete Buttigieg favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hvn't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         36      32      31       1
Dec 10, 2019         31      29      39       1
Sep 25, 2019         28      28      43       1
May 21, 2019         23      19      57       1
See Democratic/Democratic leaner trends in additional trend information at top of page 
 
 
                  
 
 

18. Is your opinion of Amy Klobuchar favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about her?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            32%    10%    58%    28%    30%    35%    43%    20%
Unfavorable          22     45      9     13     27     18     19     28
Hvn't hrd enough     44     44     33     58     42     47     38     50
REFUSED               1      1      1      1      1      1      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            25%    29%    34%    41%    30%    33%    32%    50%    27%
Unfavorable          19     19     25     23     27     20     23      8     17
Hvn't hrd enough     54     50     40     35     43     45     44     43     56
REFUSED               2      1      -      1      1      1      1      -      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            57%    62%    51%    59%    57%    56%    63%    56%    68%    55%
Unfavorable           8     17      5      6     13      5      6      5      6      7
Hvn't hrd enough     35     19     44     34     30     38     30     38     25     37
REFUSED               1      1      -      1      1      1      1      -      1      1
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            58%    51%    41%    52%    64%    69%    51%    63%    59%
Unfavorable           9      6     17      9      6      2      9      4     12
Hvn't hrd enough     33     41     41     38     30     29     40     33     28
REFUSED               1      1      1      1      -      -      -      -      1
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Amy Klobuchar favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about her?

                                     Hvn't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         33      22      44       1
Dec 10, 2019         24      23      51       1
Sep 25, 2019         20      25      54       1
May 21, 2019         16      19      64       1
See Democratic/Democratic leaner trends in additional trend information at top of page 
 
 
                  
 
 

19. Is your opinion of Michael Bloomberg favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            34%     8%    58%    35%    30%    39%    40%    22%
Unfavorable          40     71     18     35     46     34     39     50
Hvn't hrd enough     25     21     23     29     24     26     20     28
REFUSED               -      -      -      1      -      -      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            29%    34%    35%    40%    27%    34%    31%    60%    28%
Unfavorable          36     38     42     40     50     39     44     11     36
Hvn't hrd enough     35     27     22     20     22     26     24     29     36
REFUSED               -      1      1      -      -      1      1      -      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            58%    41%    57%    65%    50%    63%    60%    63%    65%    52%
Unfavorable          18     36     17     11     25     13     17      7     17     16
Hvn't hrd enough     24     22     26     24     25     23     22     30     18     30
REFUSED               -      2      -      -      -      1      1      -      -      2
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            58%    56%    38%    54%    66%    70%    50%    62%    61%
Unfavorable          18     15     36     20      8      6     19     16     20
Hvn't hrd enough     23     27     25     25     25     24     30     21     19
REFUSED               -      2      -      -      1      -      -      1      -
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Michael Bloomberg favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hav't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         34      40      25       -
Dec 10, 2019         21      40      37       1
Dec 19, 2018         22      32      44       2
Feb 18, 2016         21      26      50       2
Feb 05, 2016         20      25      53       2
See Democratic/Democratic leaner trends in additional trend information at top of page 
 
 
                  
 
 

20. Is your opinion of Andrew Yang favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            28%    10%    44%    29%    30%    26%    32%    23%
Unfavorable          20     36     11     15     22     19     21     24
Hvn't hrd enough     51     53     45     55     48     54     46     53
REFUSED               1      1      1      1      1      1      1      -
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            37%    26%    25%    26%    30%    26%    28%    26%    31%
Unfavorable          15     18     22     24     22     22     22     11     10
Hvn't hrd enough     48     54     54     50     48     51     49     63     59
REFUSED               -      2      -      1      1      1      1      -      -
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            43%    59%    46%    37%    51%    38%    47%    26%    48%    46%
Unfavorable          11     14      4     12     10     11     11     10     11     11
Hvn't hrd enough     46     27     50     51     39     50     41     64     40     43
REFUSED               -      -      -      1      -      1      1      -      1      -
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            44%    42%    54%    35%    42%    42%    38%    44%    49%
Unfavorable          11      7     12     10      9     13     11     10     13
Hvn't hrd enough     45     52     35     54     49     46     51     46     38
REFUSED               1      -      -      1      -      -      -      -      -
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Andrew Yang favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hav't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         28      20      51       1
Sep 25, 2019         20      27      52       1
May 21, 2019          8      13      76       2
See Democratic/Democratic leaner trends in additional trend information at top of page 
 
 
                  
 
 

21. Is your opinion of Tom Steyer favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            17%     3%    31%    17%    16%    18%    21%    12%
Unfavorable          25     45     13     19     28     21     23     30
Hvn't hrd enough     58     51     55     64     55     60     55     57
REFUSED               1      1      1      1      1      1      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            12%    11%    21%    23%    16%    18%    17%    23%    12%
Unfavorable          21     20     29     27     29     24     27     13     21
Hvn't hrd enough     67     68     50     49     54     58     56     65     67
REFUSED               -      1      -      1      1      1      1      -      1
 
                     DEMOCRATS/DEMOCRATIC LEANERS.......................................
                            POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY                             WHITE......
                            LIBERAL.....  Mod/                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Very   Smwht  Cons   Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Yes    No
 
Favorable            32%    37%    32%    30%    32%    32%    36%    27%    38%    33%
Unfavorable          12     19     10     11     15     10     13     10     14     12
Hvn't hrd enough     56     44     58     59     52     58     50     63     48     54
REFUSED               1      -      -      1      1      1      1      -      -      1
 
                     PARTYID.....  AGE IN YRS..............    INCOME.............
                     Dem    DemLn  18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    <50k   50-100 100k+
 
Favorable            31%    35%    21%    19%    45%    42%    31%    31%    32%
Unfavorable          13      5     14     15      7     12     12      9     16
Hvn't hrd enough     55     58     65     65     48     44     56     60     51
REFUSED               1      2      1      1      -      2      -      -      1
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Tom Steyer favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hav't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         17      25      58       1
Sep 25, 2019          7      22      69       1
See Democratic/Democratic leaner trends in additional trend information at top of page 
 
 
                  
 
 

22. Is your opinion of Donald Trump favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Favorable            42%    89%     4%    41%    50%    35%    38%    58%
Unfavorable          55      9     95     55     48     62     60     37
Hvn't hrd enough      1      -      1      2      1      1      1      1
REFUSED               2      2      -      2      2      2      1      3
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Favorable            33%    37%    52%    42%    54%    43%    48%    12%    31%
Unfavorable          63     59     47     54     43     54     49     86     64
Hvn't hrd enough      3      -      1      1      -      1      1      1      3
REFUSED               2      3      -      2      2      2      2      1      2
 

TREND: Is your opinion of Donald Trump favorable, unfavorable or haven’t you heard enough about him?

                                     Hvn't
                     Fav     Unfav   HrdEn   REF
 
Feb 10, 2020         42      55       1       2
Dec 10, 2019         40      57       2       2
Oct 14, 2019         39      56       2       3
Sep 25, 2019         38      55       4       3
May 21, 2019         38      57       2       3
Jan 15, 2019         41      56       2       2
Dec 19, 2018         40      56       2       2
Feb 21, 2018         37      59       2       2
Jan 17, 2018         38      58       3       1
Oct 11, 2017         39      57       2       2

See additional trend information at top of page

23. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG   Wht  
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No     Evang
                                                                                  
Approve              43%    89%     4%    46%    51%    36%    41%    60%    79%  
Disapprove           53      9     94     50     46     60     58     36     19   
DK/NA                 3      2      2      4      3      3      1      4      1   
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve              37%    41%    51%    42%    57%    45%    51%    10%    32%
Disapprove           59     56     47     54     41     52     47     86     62
DK/NA                 4      3      2      4      2      3      2      4      5
 

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?

                     App     Dis     DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         43      53       3 
Jan 28, 2020         43      52       5 
Jan 13, 2020         43      52       5 
Dec 16, 2019         43      52       5 
Dec 10, 2019         41      55       4
Nov 26, 2019         40      54       6
Oct 23, 2019         38      58       5
Oct 14, 2019         41      54       5
Oct 08, 2019         40      54       6
Sep 30, 2019         41      53       6

See additional trend information at top of page

23a. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president? COMBINED WITH: (If approve/disapprove q23) Do you strongly or somewhat approve/disapprove?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG   Wht  
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No     Evang
                                                                                  
Approve strongly     35%    77%     3%    30%    40%    30%    30%    51%    69%  
Approve smwht         9     12      1     15     11      6     11      9     10   
Disapprove smwht      6      4      6      8      6      7      4      6      3   
Disapprove strongly  47      4     88     42     40     53     53     30     16   
DK/NA                 4      2      3      5      4      4      1      4      2   
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve strongly     25%    29%    42%    38%    45%    37%    40%     7%    23%
Approve smwht        11     12      9      4     13      8     10      3      9
Disapprove smwht     12      6      4      4      5      5      5      8     10
Disapprove strongly  47     49     42     50     36     47     42     77     51
DK/NA                 4      4      3      4      2      3      3      5      6
 

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president? COMBINED WITH: (If approve/disapprove) Do you strongly or somewhat approve/disapprove?

                     APPROVE......   DISAPPROVE.....
                     Strngly Smwht   Smwht   Strngly DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         35       9       6      47       4 
Jan 28, 2020         34       8       6      47       5
Jan 13, 2020         34       9       6      46       6
Dec 16, 2019         34       9       5      46       6
Dec 10, 2019         31      10       5      49       4
Nov 26, 2019         32       7       4      50       6
Oct 23, 2019         28       9       4      53       5
Oct 14, 2019         31      10       5      48       5
Oct 08, 2019         29      11       6      47       7
Sep 30, 2019         35       6       4      48       7 

See additional trend information at top of page

24. Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are handling their job?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Approve              39%    81%     8%    36%    43%    36%    34%    53%
Disapprove           57     16     89     59     54     59     63     42
DK/NA                 4      3      2      4      4      5      2      5
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve              35%    34%    45%    41%    46%    41%    43%    16%    35%
Disapprove           59     62     52     54     51     55     53     82     53
DK/NA                 6      4      3      6      3      4      4      2     12
 

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Republicans in Congress are handling their job?

                     App     Dis     DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         39      57       4 
Dec 16, 2019         37      57       7 
Nov 26, 2019         32      60       8
Oct 14, 2019         28      64       8
Sep 30, 2019         33      61       6
Jun 12, 2019         27      66       7
Mar 05, 2019         27      66       8
Jan 29, 2019         30      65       6
Jan 15, 2019         29      63       8
Dec 19, 2018         28      63       9

See additional trend information at top of page

25. Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are handling their job?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Approve              37%     5%    73%    28%    31%    43%    41%    25%
Disapprove           60     94     25     69     67     54     57     73
DK/NA                 3      1      2      3      2      3      2      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve              33%    39%    33%    44%    29%    36%    33%    63%    41%
Disapprove           63     59     66     52     69     61     65     34     53
DK/NA                 4      2      1      4      2      3      2      3      7
 

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way the Democrats in Congress are handling their job?

                     App     Dis     DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         37      60       3
Dec 16, 2019         39      56       5
Nov 26, 2019         36      57       8
Oct 14, 2019         35      58       8
Sep 30, 2019         32      62       6
Jun 12, 2019         34      59       7
Mar 05, 2019         38      56       6
Jan 29, 2019         38      57       5
Jan 15, 2019         37      56       7
Dec 19, 2018         32      59       9

See additional trend information at top of page

26. Would you say that Donald Trump – is honest, or not?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Yes                  37%    82%     4%    31%    40%    33%    32%    53%
No                   58     12     95     63     54     63     63     42
DK/NA                 5      6      1      6      6      4      5      6
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Yes                  27%    30%    45%    41%    45%    40%    42%    10%    26%
No                   68     65     50     55     49     56     52     86     70
DK/NA                 5      5      5      4      6      5      5      3      4
 

TREND: Would you say that Donald Trump is honest, or not?

                     Yes     No      DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         37      58       5
Sep 30, 2019         37      57       6
Mar 05, 2019         30      65       5 
Jan 15, 2019         34      61       5
Nov 20, 2018         36      58       5
Sep 10, 2018         32      60       9
Jul 03, 2018         38      58       4
Jun 06, 2018         35      59       6
Mar 21, 2018         38      57       5
Jan 25, 2018         35      60       5

See additional trend information at top of page

27. Would you say that Donald Trump – has good leadership skills, or not?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Yes                  43%    88%     8%    40%    50%    37%    36%    63%
No                   55     11     90     57     48     61     61     36
DK/NA                 2      1      1      3      2      2      2      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Yes                  43%    37%    49%    42%    54%    45%    49%    14%    33%
No                   56     60     50     55     44     53     49     86     64
DK/NA                 1      2      1      3      2      2      2      1      3
 

TREND: Would you say that Donald Trump has good leadership skills, or not?

                     Yes     No      DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         43      55       2
Mar 05, 2019         39      58       3
Jan 15, 2019         39      58       3
Nov 20, 2018         42      55       3
Sep 10, 2018         38      57       5
Jul 03, 2018         43      55       2
Jun 06, 2018         41      56       4
Mar 21, 2018         41      56       3
Jan 25, 2018         38      59       3
Jan 10, 2018         39      59       2

See additional trend information at top of page

28. Would you say that Donald Trump – cares about average Americans, or not?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Yes                  44%    91%     5%    43%    50%    38%    40%    61%
No                   55      8     94     54     48     61     59     38
DK/NA                 2      1      2      3      2      2      2      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Yes                  35%    39%    53%    44%    55%    46%    50%    12%    34%
No                   63     59     46     54     43     53     49     86     63
DK/NA                 2      2      1      2      2      1      1      2      3
 

TREND: Would you say that Donald Trump cares about average Americans, or not?

                     Yes     No      DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         44      55       2
Mar 05, 2019         39      58       3 
Jan 15, 2019         43      55       2
Nov 20, 2018         42      53       4
Sep 10, 2018         41      55       4
Jul 03, 2018         43      55       2
Jun 06, 2018         42      55       3
Mar 21, 2018         43      53       4
Jan 25, 2018         40      57       3
Jan 10, 2018         38      59       2

See additional trend information at top of page

29. Do you feel that Donald Trump is doing more to unite the country as president, or doing more to divide the country as president?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Unite                37%    82%     3%    34%    43%    32%    32%    55%
Divide               57     12     95     57     51     62     63     38
DK/NA                 6      6      2      9      5      6      5      7
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Unite                31%    32%    45%    39%    49%    39%    43%     9%    29%
Divide               66     61     49     55     45     55     51     88     67
DK/NA                 4      7      6      6      6      6      6      2      4
 

TREND: Do you feel that Donald Trump is doing more to unite the country as President, or doing more to divide the country as President? (Prior to Feb 22, 2017 “will do more”)

                     Unite   Divide  DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         37      57       6
Aug 28, 2019         30      62       8 
Jul 03, 2018         36      58       5
Feb 07, 2018         35      60       6
Jan 17, 2018         31      64       5
Dec 12, 2017         32      62       7
Oct 11, 2017         37      58       5
Sep 27, 2017         35      60       5
Aug 23, 2017         31      62       7
Apr 19, 2017         36      59       6

See additional trend information at top of page

30. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling – the economy?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Approve              54%    97%    15%    59%    62%    47%    50%    70%
Disapprove           42      3     81     37     34     49     47     27
DK/NA                 4      1      4      4      4      5      3      3
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve              50%    54%    59%    52%    66%    55%    60%    28%    46%
Disapprove           44     42     39     44     31     42     37     69     44
DK/NA                 5      4      2      4      3      3      3      3     10
 

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling the economy?

                     App     Dis     DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         54      42       4
Jan 13, 2020         57      38       5 
Dec 10, 2019         54      42       4
Oct 23, 2019         48      48       4
Oct 14, 2019         49      46       5
Sep 25, 2019         48      47       5
Aug 28, 2019         46      49       5
May 21, 2019         48      45       7
Mar 05, 2019         49      45       7
Jan 29, 2019         46      51       3

See additional trend information at top of page

31. Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling – foreign policy?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Approve              43%    90%     5%    43%    51%    37%    40%    61%
Disapprove           53      8     92     54     47     58     58     36
DK/NA                 3      2      3      3      2      5      2      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve              36%    42%    51%    42%    57%    45%    50%     9%    33%
Disapprove           59     55     48     53     43     51     47     87     57
DK/NA                 4      3      2      5      1      4      2      3     10
 

TREND: Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling foreign policy?

                     App     Dis     DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         43      53       3
Jan 13, 2020         43      53       4
Dec 10, 2019         40      56       4
Oct 23, 2019         35      61       4
Oct 14, 2019         37      57       5
Sep 25, 2019         37      57       6
Aug 28, 2019         38      56       6
May 21, 2019         37      58       6
Mar 05, 2019         38      56       6
Jan 29, 2019         37      58       5

See additional trend information at top of page

32. Would you describe the state of the nation’s economy these days as excellent, good, not so good, or poor?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Excellent            25%    55%     3%    20%    30%    20%    24%    34%
Good                 45     38     46     51     48     42     53     44
Not so good          21      5     35     21     17     26     16     16
Poor                  8      1     15      6      5     10      7      5
DK/NA                 2      1      1      2      -      3      1      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Excellent            15%    20%    31%    29%    33%    25%    29%     6%    14%
Good                 48     49     40     43     49     48     49     30     47
Not so good          28     20     22     18     13     17     16     42     32
Poor                  7      9      7      8      3      8      6     21      4
DK/NA                 2      2      1      1      -      2      1      1      3
 

TREND: Would you describe the state of the nation’s economy these days as excellent, good, not so good, or poor?

                                     Not so
                     Exclnt  Good    Good    Poor    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         25      45      21       8       2
Dec 16, 2019         26      47      19       6       2 
Dec 10, 2019         22      47      22       8       2
Oct 23, 2019         17      44      26      10       2
Sep 25, 2019         16      43      28      11       2
Aug 28, 2019         18      43      27      10       2
Jun 11, 2019         19      51      20       8       1
May 21, 2019         22      49      20       8       1
Jan 15, 2019         15      49      26       9       2
Dec 18, 2018         14      51      25      10       1

See additional trend information at top of page

33. In general, how satisfied are you with the way things are going for you financially; are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Very satisfied       37%    64%    20%    36%    39%    36%    42%    42%
Smwht satisfied      38     29     44     40     41     36     42     37
Smwht dissatisfied   14      4     23     13     12     17      8     14
Very dissatisfied     8      2     12     10      7      9      6      6
DK/NA                 2      2      1      2      2      2      1      1
 
                    AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Very satisfied       23%    40%    43%    41%    42%    42%    42%    15%    34%
Smwht satisfied      47     38     34     37     44     36     40     38     34
Smwht dissatisfied   23     14     11     12      9     13     11     25     24
Very dissatisfied     6      6     11      7      4      7      6     19      6
DK/NA                 1      2      1      2      1      2      1      2      1
 
 

34. Would you say that you are better off or worse off financially today than you were in 2016?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Better off           59%    84%    36%    60%    67%    52%    60%    68%
Worse off            20      3     33     21     17     22     16     15
SAME(VOL)            19     11     29     18     15     24     22     16
DK/NA                 2      2      1      1      2      2      2      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Better off           68%    60%    60%    49%    73%    56%    64%    37%    56%
Worse off            15     22     22     19     12     19     16     41     20
SAME(VOL)            16     17     16     28     14     24     19     21     22
DK/NA                 2      1      1      4      1      2      2      1      3
 

TREND: Would you say that you are better off or worse off financially today than you were in 2016?

                     Better  Worse
                     off     off     SAME    DK/NA
 
Feb 10, 2020         59      20      19       2
Dec 10, 2019         57      22      19       2
Sep 25, 2019         50      25      22       3
May 21, 2019         52      21      23       4
 
 

35. As you may know, the Senate has voted to acquit President Trump of both articles of impeachment, which means he will remain in office. Do you approve or disapprove of the Senate’s decision?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Approve              49%    95%     8%    53%    57%    43%    45%    68%
Disapprove           49      4     90     45     42     55     52     31
DK/NA                 2      1      1      2      2      2      3      1
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Approve              45%    47%    56%    47%    62%    52%    57%    16%    39%
Disapprove           51     51     43     51     36     47     42     83     57
DK/NA                 3      2      1      2      2      2      2      1      3
 
 

36. As you may know, the articles of impeachment were based on President Trump’s actions involving Ukraine. Do you think that the Senate voting to acquit President Trump clears him of any wrongdoing in the Ukraine matter, or don’t you think so?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Yes/Clears him       40%    81%     6%    40%    46%    34%    36%    56%
No                   55     12     91     54     49     60     59     40
DK/NA                 5      7      3      6      5      6      5      4
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Yes/Clears him       29%    37%    48%    40%    52%    41%    46%    14%    31%
No                   65     57     47     55     45     53     49     81     62
DK/NA                 6      5      4      5      3      6      5      5      7
 
 

37. Regardless of the Senate’s verdict, do you think the charges against President Trump were serious enough for him to be impeached and put on trial, or would you say the charges were not serious enough for him to have been impeached and put on trial?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Serious enough       51%     8%    89%    49%    44%    57%    54%    36%
Not serious enough   46     91      9     49     52     40     44     60
DK/NA                 3      2      2      3      3      3      2      3
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Serious enough       59%    54%    42%    52%    38%    52%    45%    79%    54%
Not serious enough   36     44     56     46     59     46     52     21     39
DK/NA                 5      2      2      3      4      2      3      1      6
 
 

38. Do you think that the Senate impeachment trial of President Trump was conducted fairly or unfairly?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Fairly               35%    54%    18%    39%    40%    30%    34%    41%
Unfairly             59     41     78     56     56     62     61     54
DK/NA                 6      5      4      6      4      8      5      5
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Fairly               29%    32%    41%    35%    41%    34%    37%    21%    34%
Unfairly             65     61     54     58     56     59     58     74     54
DK/NA                 6      7      5      7      3      7      5      5     12
 
 

39. Are you concerned that President Trump will seek help from a foreign government in his 2020 presidential re-election campaign, or aren’t you concerned about that?

                                                               WHITE......
                                                               COLLEGE DEG
                     Tot    Rep    Dem    Ind    Men    Wom    Yes    No
 
Yes/Concerned        47%     6%    85%    45%    40%    54%    53%    32%
No                   50     92     13     53     58     44     46     65
DK/NA                 3      1      2      2      2      3      1      2
 
                     AGE IN YRS..............    WHITE.....
                     18-34  35-49  50-64  65+    Men    Wom    Wht    Blk    Hsp
 
Yes/Concerned        47%    51%    41%    52%    36%    49%    43%    73%    43%
No                   50     47     57     45     63     49     56     23     52

;

Story 2: President Trump Talks To America’s Governors At Business Summit — Videos

Trump Addresses State Governors At Business Summit | White House | 2 10 20

Trump speaks to governors at business summit

 

Story 3: Coronavirus Has Killed Killed 910 in China and Exceeds SARS Death Toll — Videos

 

Coronavirus overtakes SARS death toll

 

Death toll from killer coronavirus is 10 TIMES higher than average in China’s Hubei province because thousands of patients with mild symptoms are not seeking help, scientists claim

  • Officials have repeatedly claimed the death toll in China is around two per cent
  • But virologists tracking the outbreak say the case-fatality ratio is higher in Hubei
  • Imperial College London researchers believe it is closer to the 18 per cent mark
  • This is because only the most severe patients are coming forward to be treated 
  • More than 40,000 patients have been infected, with at least 900 patients dead
  • Do you have a story about coronavirus? Email connor.boyd@mailonline.co.uk 

ust under a fifth of cases of the killer coronavirus in Hubei – the deserted Chinese province at the centre of the outbreak – result in death, leading scientists have today claimed.

Officials have repeatedly claimed the death toll is around two per cent, making the SARS-like infection far less deadly than similar coronaviruses and more severe than the flu.

But virologists tracking the escalating outbreak say the case-fatality ratio is much higher in Hubei than elsewhere in China because only the most severe patients are coming forward to be treated.

Figures show the actual toll in Hubei – the province home to Wuhan – is 871 deaths from 29,631 infected patients. But Imperial College London researchers believe it will be closer to the 18 per cent mark.

More than 40,000 people across the world have now caught the unnamed infection, with eight cases now recorded in the UK, 12 in the US and 15 in Australia. The virus is spread on surfaces and through coughs and sneezes.

It comes as the World Health Organization chief today warned the coronavirus crisis publicised so far could ‘only be the tip of the iceberg’ amid fears that thousands of cases are going missing.

Nearly 100 people died from coronavirus in China yesterday on the deadliest day of the six-week outbreak so far. But the number of new patients diagnosed appears to be dropping day-by-day.

More than 40,000 people have been infected with the virus and 910 are confirmed to have died, all but two of them in China

More than 40,000 people have now caught the killer coronavirus – nearly 99 per cent of the cases have been recorded in China

WUHAN CORONAVIRUS: WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR

What is this virus?

The virus has been identified as a new type of coronavirus. Coronaviruses are a large family of pathogens, most of which cause mild lung infections such as the common cold.

But coronaviruses can also be deadly. SARS, or severe acute respiratory syndrome, is caused by a coronavirus and killed hundreds of people in China and Hong Kong in the early 2000s.

Can the Wuhan coronavirus kill?

Yes – 910 people have so far died after testing positive for the virus.

What are the symptoms?

Some people who catch the Wuhan coronavirus may not have any symptoms at all, or only very mild ones like a sore throat or a headache.

Others may suffer from a fever, cough or trouble breathing.

And a small proportion of patients will go on to develop severe infection which can damage the lungs or cause pneumonia, a life-threatening condition which causes swelling and fluid build-up in the lungs.

How is it detected?

The virus’s genetic sequencing was released by scientists in China and countries around the world have used this to create lab tests, which must be carried out to confirm an infection.

Delays to these tests, to test results and to people getting to hospitals in China, mean the number of confirmed cases is expected to be just a fraction of the true scale of the outbreak.

How did it start and spread?

The first cases identified were among people connected to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan.

Cases have since been identified around China and are known to have spread from person to person.

What are countries doing to prevent the spread?

Countries all over the world have banned foreign travellers from crossing their borders if they have been to China within the past two weeks. Many airlines have cancelled or drastically reduced flights to and from mainland China.

Is it similar to anything we’ve ever seen before?

Experts have compared it to the 2003 outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). The epidemic started in southern China and killed more than 700 people in mainland China, Hong Kong and elsewhere.

In comparison to other coronaviruses, the new strain, first found in Wuhan and thought to have spread to humans from a traditional wet market, is much less deadly.

Figures show the highly contagious severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which also began in China, killed around 10 per cent of the 8,000 patients it struck during a worldwide epidemic in 2002/03.

And the World Health Organization says the death rate for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS) is even higher – at around 34 per cent. It was first reported in Saudi Arabia in 2012.

One of the world’s deadliest diseases, Ebola, kill around half of all patients it strikes. Ebola is much different to this new coronavirus because it is caused by a separate family of viruses.

The Imperial College London team, who has tracked the coronavirus outbreak first began six weeks ago, said they estimate the overall case-fatality ratio is still likely to be around one per cent.

Experts have repeatedly said potentially thousands of patients may not go to their doctor for treatment because they may have such minor symptoms – such as a cough and fever – that they do not need to seek help.

Professor Neil Ferguson, who led the Imperial team, wrote: ‘Outside mainland China, countries alert to the risk of infection being imported via international travel have instituted surveillance for 2019-nCoV infection with a broader set of clinical criteria for defining a suspected case, typically including a combination of symptoms (cough and fever) combined with recent travel history to the affected region (Wuhan/Hubei).

‘Such surveillance is therefore likely to pick up clinically milder cases as well as the more severe cases also being detected in mainland China.

‘However, by restricting testing to those with a travel history or link, it is also likely to miss other symptomatic cases (and possibly hospitalised cases with atypical pneumonia) that have occurred through local transmission or through travel to other affected areas of China.’

The researchers added: ‘It is important to note that the differences in these estimates does not reflect underlying differences in disease severity between countries.

‘CFRs seen in individual countries will vary depending on the sensitivity of different surveillance systems to detect cases of differing levels of severity and the clinical care offered to severely ill cases.

‘All CFR estimates should be viewed cautiously at the current time as the sensitivity of surveillance of both deaths and cases in mainland China is unclear.’

Figures also show 910 people have now died across the world, with all but two deaths recorded in mainland China

Figures also show 910 people have now died across the world, with all but two deaths recorded in mainland China

HOW THE CORONAVIRUS HAS SPREAD OVER TIME

The vast majority of coronavirus cases have been in mainland China, but more than 25 other countries and territories have declared infections:

  • Belgium: 1 case, first case February 4
  • Spain: 2 case, first case January 31
  • Sweden: 1 case, first case January 31
  • Russia: 2 cases, first case January 31
  • UK: 8 cases, first case January 31
  • India: 3 cases, first case January 30
  • Philippines: 3 cases, first case January 30
  • Italy: 3 cases, first case January 30
  • Finland: 1 case, first case January 29
  • United Arab Emirates: 7 cases, first case January 29
  • Germany: 14 cases, first case Jan 27
  • Sri Lanka: 1 case, first case Jan 27
  • Cambodia: 1 case, first case Jan 27
  • Canada: 7 cases, first case Jan 25
  • Australia: 15 cases, first case Jan 25
  • Malaysia: 18 cases, first case Jan 25
  • France: 11 cases, first case January 24
  • Nepal: 1 case, first case January 24
  • Vietnam: 14 cases, first case Jan 24
  • Singapore: 43 cases, first case January 23
  • Macau: 10 cases, first case Jan 22
  • Hong Kong: 36 cases, first case January 22
  • Taiwan: 18 cases, first case Jan 21
  • USA: 12 cases, first case January 20
  • South Korea: 27 cases, first case January 20
  • Japan: 156 cases, first case January 16
  • Thailand: 32 cases, first case Jan 13

Professor Ferguson added: ‘It’s not more severe in Hubei than elsewhere. It’s just that they’re only detecting and reporting the most severe cases there. We estimate there are at least 10 times more cases than reported in Hubei. Most of which likely have rather milder symptoms.’

In other developments today, police in the UK have been given the power to seize people trying to escape coronavirus quarantine and force them back into isolation in handcuffs.

A law-change was revealed after an patient staying at Arrowe Park Hospital on the Wirral tried to leave before completing the 14-day stay after his return from China.

Government sources said those who returned to the UK on the evacuation flights on January 31 were given a ‘very clear choice’ and had to sign contracts saying they would remain in isolation for a fortnight.

But a source involved with the Arrowe Park incident said: ‘We found we didn’t have the necessary enforcement powers to make sure they didn’t leave.’

Police will now be able to force people to remain in the units and, if they leave, to arrest them for committing an offence and take them back to the quarantine facility, MailOnline understands.

The new rule comes as England today announced its fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth cases of the virus – all of the three men and a woman are linked to the fourth patient, who has now been dubbed a ‘super-spreader’.

The fourth patient was a businessman who returned to the UK from a conference in Singapore via a ski chalet in France, where other Britons were subsequently taken ill with the virus.

The Department of Health today declared the outbreak a ‘serious and imminent’ threat to the British public as it announced new powers to fight the spread.

In other developments to the outbreak today:

  • World Health Organization chief warns coronavirus outbreak could ‘only be the tip of the iceberg’ amid fears thousands of cases are going missing
  • Just under a fifth of known cases of the new coronavirus in China may be resulting in death, a new report estimates
  • The coronavirus can survive on door handles and bus or train poles for up to nine days – more than four times longer than flu, according to research
  • London’s FTSE 100 weakened after Mr Hancock declared the coronavirus outbreak a serious and imminent threat to public health
  • Nearly 100 people died from coronavirus in China yesterday on the deadliest day of the six-week outbreak so far
  • Amazon and Sony are the latest companies to pull out of this month’s Mobile World Congress, due to be held in Barcelona, because of the coronavirus outbreak
  • Sixty-six more passengers on a cruise ship in Japan have been diagnosed the killer infection, taking the ship’s toll to around 136

A total of five people have now been diagnosed in Brighton. The four new cases have been linked to the first man who was diagnosed there after returning from the Alps

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT THE DEADLY CORONAVIRUS IN CHINA?

Someone who is infected with the Wuhan coronavirus can spread it with just a simple cough or a sneeze, scientists say.

At least 910 people with the virus are now confirmed to have died and more than 40,640 have been infected in at least 28 countries and regions. But experts predict the true number of people with the disease could be 100,000, or even as high as 350,000 in Wuhan alone, as they warn it may kill as many as two in 100 cases.  Here’s what we know so far:

What is the Wuhan coronavirus?

A coronavirus is a type of virus which can cause illness in animals and people. Viruses break into cells inside their host and use them to reproduce itself and disrupt the body’s normal functions. Coronaviruses are named after the Latin word ‘corona’, which means crown, because they are encased by a spiked shell which resembles a royal crown.

The coronavirus from Wuhan is one which has never been seen before this outbreak. It is currently named 2019-nCoV, and does not have a more detailed name because so little is known about it.

Dr Helena Maier, from the Pirbright Institute, said: ‘Coronaviruses are a family of viruses that infect a wide range of different species including humans, cattle, pigs, chickens, dogs, cats and wild animals.

‘Until this new coronavirus was identified, there were only six different coronaviruses known to infect humans. Four of these cause a mild common cold-type illness, but since 2002 there has been the emergence of two new coronaviruses that can infect humans and result in more severe disease (Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) coronaviruses).

‘Coronaviruses are known to be able to occasionally jump from one species to another and that is what happened in the case of SARS, MERS and the new coronavirus. The animal origin of the new coronavirus is not yet known.’

The first human cases were publicly reported from the Chinese city of Wuhan, where approximately 11million people live, after medics first started seeing infections on December 31.

By January 8, 59 suspected cases had been reported and seven people were in critical condition. Tests were developed for the new virus and recorded cases started to surge.

The first person died that week and, by January 16, two were dead and 41 cases were confirmed. The next day, scientists predicted that 1,700 people had become infected, possibly up to 7,000.

Just a week after that, there had been more than 800 confirmed cases and those same scientists estimated that some 4,000 – possibly 9,700 – were infected in Wuhan alone. By that point, 26 people had died. 

By January 27, more than 2,800 people were confirmed to have been infected, 81 had died, and estimates of the total number of cases ranged from 100,000 to 350,000 in Wuhan alone.

By January 29, the number of deaths had risen to 132 and cases were in excess of 6,000.  

By February 5, there were more than 24,000 cases and 492 deaths.

Where does the virus come from?

According to scientists, the virus has almost certainly come from bats. Coronaviruses in general tend to originate in animals – the similar SARS and MERS viruses are believed to have originated in civet cats and camels, respectively.

The first cases of the virus in Wuhan came from people visiting or working in a live animal market in the city, which has since been closed down for investigation.

Although the market is officially a seafood market, other dead and living animals were being sold there, including wolf cubs, salamanders, snakes, peacocks, porcupines and camel meat.

A study by the Wuhan Institute of Virology, published in February 2020 in the scientific journal Nature, found that the genetic make-up virus samples found in patients in China is 96 per cent similar to a coronavirus they found in bats.

There may have been an animal which acted as a middle-man, contracting it from a bat before then transmitting it to a human, researchers suggested, although details of this are less clear.

Dr Michael Skinner, a virologist at Imperial College London, was not involved with the research but said: ‘The discovery definitely places the origin of nCoV in bats in China.

‘We still do not know whether another species served as an intermediate host to amplify the virus, and possibly even to bring it to the market, nor what species that host might have been.’

So far the fatalities are quite low. Why are health experts so worried about it? 

Experts say the international community is concerned about the virus because so little is known about it and it appears to be spreading quickly.

It is similar to SARS, which infected 8,000 people and killed nearly 800 in an outbreak in Asia in 2003, in that it is a type of coronavirus which infects humans’ lungs.

Another reason for concern is that nobody has any immunity to the virus because they’ve never encountered it before. This means it may be able to cause more damage than viruses we come across often, like the flu or common cold.

Speaking at a briefing in January, Oxford University professor, Dr Peter Horby, said: ‘Novel viruses can spread much faster through the population than viruses which circulate all the time because we have no immunity to them.

‘Most seasonal flu viruses have a case fatality rate of less than one in 1,000 people. Here we’re talking about a virus where we don’t understand fully the severity spectrum but it’s possible the case fatality rate could be as high as two per cent.’

If the death rate is truly two per cent, that means two out of every 100 patients who get it will die.

‘My feeling is it’s lower,’ Dr Horby added. ‘We’re probably missing this iceberg of milder cases. But that’s the current circumstance we’re in.

‘Two per cent case fatality rate is comparable to the Spanish Flu pandemic in 1918 so it is a significant concern globally.’

How does the virus spread?

The illness can spread between people just through coughs and sneezes, making it an extremely contagious infection. And it may also spread even before someone has symptoms.

It is believed to travel in the saliva and even through water in the eyes, therefore close contact, kissing, and sharing cutlery or utensils are all risky.

Originally, people were thought to be catching it from a live animal market in Wuhan city. But cases soon began to emerge in people who had never been there, which forced medics to realise it was spreading from person to person.

There is now evidence that it can spread third hand – to someone from a person who caught it from another person.

What does the virus do to you? What are the symptoms?

Once someone has caught the virus it may take between two and 14 days for them to show any symptoms – but they may still be contagious during this time.

If and when they do become ill, typical signs include a runny nose, a cough, sore throat and a fever (high temperature). The vast majority of patients – at least 97 per cent, based on available data – will recover from these without any issues or medical help.

In a small group of patients, who seem mainly to be the elderly or those with long-term illnesses, it can lead to pneumonia. Pneumonia is an infection in which the insides of the lungs swell up and fill with fluid. It makes it increasingly difficult to breathe and, if left untreated, can be fatal and suffocate people. 

What have genetic tests revealed about the virus? 

Scientists in China have recorded the genetic sequences of around 19 strains of the virus and released them to experts working around the world.

This allows others to study them, develop tests and potentially look into treating the illness they cause.

Examinations have revealed the coronavirus did not change much – changing is known as mutating – much during the early stages of its spread.

However, the director-general of China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Gao Fu, yesterday said the virus was mutating and adapting as it spread through people.

This means efforts to study the virus and to potentially control it may be made extra difficult because the virus might look different every time scientists analyse it.

More study may be able to reveal whether the virus first infected a small number of people then change and spread from them, or whether there were various versions of the virus coming from animals which have developed separately.

How dangerous is the virus?  

The virus has so far killed 910 people out of a total of at least 40,640 officially confirmed cases – a death rate of around two per cent. This is a similar death rate to the Spanish Flu outbreak which, in 1918, went on to kill around 50million people.

However, experts say the true number of patients is likely considerably higher and therefore the death rate considerably lower. Imperial College London researchers estimate that there were 4,000 (up to 9,700) cases in Wuhan city alone up to January 18 – officially there were only 444 there to that date. If cases are in fact 100 times more common than the official figures, the virus may be far less dangerous than currently believed, but also far more widespread.

Experts say it is likely only the most seriously ill patients are seeking help and are therefore recorded – the vast majority will have only mild, cold-like symptoms. For those whose conditions do become more severe, there is a risk of developing pneumonia which can destroy the lungs and kill you.  

Can the virus be cured?

The Wuhan coronavirus cannot currently be cured and it is proving difficult to contain.

Antibiotics do not work against viruses, so they are out of the question. Antiviral drugs can, but the process of understanding a virus then developing and producing drugs to treat it would take years and huge amounts of money.

No vaccine exists for the coronavirus yet and it’s not likely one will be developed in time to be of any use in this outbreak, for similar reasons to the above.

The National Institutes of Health in the US, and Baylor University in Waco, Texas, say they are working on a vaccine based on what they know about coronaviruses in general, using information from the SARS outbreak. But this may take a year or more to develop, according to Pharmaceutical Technology.

Currently, governments and health authorities are working to contain the virus and to care for patients who are sick and stop them infecting other people.

People who catch the illness are being quarantined in hospitals, where their symptoms can be treated and they will be away from the uninfected public.

And airports around the world are putting in place screening measures such as having doctors on-site, taking people’s temperatures to check for fevers and using thermal screening to spot those who might be ill (infection causes a raised temperature).

However, it can take weeks for symptoms to appear, so there is only a small likelihood that patients will be spotted up in an airport.

Is this outbreak an epidemic or a pandemic?

The outbreak is an epidemic, which is when a disease takes hold of one community such as a country or region.

Although it has spread to dozens of countries, the outbreak is not yet classed as a pandemic, which is defined by the World Health Organization as the ‘worldwide spread of a new disease’.

The head of WHO’s global infectious hazard preparedness, Dr Sylvie Briand, said: ‘Currently we are not in a pandemic. We are at the phase where it is an epidemic with multiple foci, and we try to extinguish the transmission in each of these foci,’ the Guardian reported.

She said that most cases outside of Hubei had been ‘spillover’ from the epicentre, so the disease wasn’t actually spreading actively around the world.

Death toll from killer coronavirus is 10 TIMES higher than average in China’s Hubei province

Coronavirus’s deadliest day yet: 97 people are killed in 24 hours in China, bringing global death toll to 910, smashing hopes that disease control measures were working

  • China reported another 3,062 cases on Sunday, halting a series of daily declines
  • The death toll has now risen to 908 in mainland China with two elsewhere 
  • It comes as millions of people return to work today after Lunar New Year break 

Nearly 100 people died from coronavirus yesterday on the deadliest day of the outbreak so far.  

The death toll in mainland China rose by 97, taking the number of global fatalities to 910.

Another 3,062 cases were reported in China yesterday – an increase of 15 per cent compared to Saturday which put an end to a series of daily declines.

The latest surge in deaths is a setback to hopes that China’s drastic quarantine measures might be working.

Two people wearing face masks walk along a a street in Shanghai today as millions of people in China were returning to work after an extended Lunar New Year break

Workers disinfect closed shops in the city of Wuhan at the centre of the outbreak today, where millions of people remain under quarantine

Workers disinfect closed shops in the city of Wuhan at the centre of the outbreak today, where millions of people remain under quarantine

‘Authorities disinfect Wuhan’ as coronavirus continues to spread

Roads in Beijing and Shanghai had significantly more traffic than in recent days and the city of Guangzhou was resuming normal public transport today.

However, the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai said 60 per cent of its member companies were planning mandatory work-from-home policies.

Tens of millions of people in Hubei province were not returning to work, as the province at the centre of the outbreak remained under lockdown.

China has built two hospitals for virus patients in Wuhan and sent thousands of extra doctors, nurses and other health care workers to the city of 1 million people.

Most access to Wuhan was suspended on January 23 and restrictions have expanded since then to cities with a total of 60 million people.

China said today that 27 foreigners had been infected with the virus in the country, including two of the country’s 908 deaths.

Two people have died outside mainland China, one in Hong Kong and the other in the Philippines, taking the global toll to 910.

More than 360 cases of the virus have been confirmed outside China, bringing the total to at least 40,531.  

The fatality toll has passed the 774 people believed to have died in the 2002-03 SARS outbreak, another viral outbreak that originated in China. 

The total of more than 40,000 confirmed cases of the new virus vastly exceeds the 8,098 sickened by SARS. 

Chinese man appears to be forcefully taken by authorities
A security officer suited in protective gear checks passports of passengers boarding a cargo plane in Wuhan

A security officer suited in protective gear checks passports of passengers boarding a cargo plane in Wuhan

Medical workers in protective suits attend to novel coronavirus patients at the intensive care unit of a hospital in Wuhan

Medical workers in protective suits attend to novel coronavirus patients at the intensive care unit of a hospital in Wuhan

Hong Kong has reported seven more cases, raising its total to 36 after the virus spread at a family gathering attended by two relatives from mainland China.

Meanwhile in Japan, another 60 people on the Diamond Princess cruise ship were today confirmed to have the virus, taking the total to around 130.

Passengers on the ship have been confined to their cabins in a two-week lockdown with confirmed virus patients taken to hospital on the mainland.

World Health Organisation chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said there are tentative signs the virus was stabilising, but said there may be more infections abroad in people who have never travelled to China.

Asian stock markets slid today amid signs that optimism over China’s disease control might be premature.

Chinese businesses are reeling from anti-disease measures that closed shops, restaurants and factories and disrupted travel.

The government has promised tax cuts and subsidies to farmers, supermarkets, producers of medical supplies and companies that contribute to anti-disease work.

WHO confirms coronavirus team heading to China to study outbreak

Doctors scan a patient's lungs at Huoshenshan temporary hospital built for patients diagnosed with coronavirus in Wuhan

Doctors scan a patient’s lungs at Huoshenshan temporary hospital built for patients diagnosed with coronavirus in Wuhan

A passenger stands at the balcony of the cruise ship Diamond Princess anchored off the Yokohama Port in Japan where another 60 cases have been confirmed

A passenger stands at the balcony of the cruise ship Diamond Princess anchored off the Yokohama Port in Japan where another 60 cases have been confirmed

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1392-1395

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1386-1391

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1379-1785

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1372-1378

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1363-1371

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1352-1362

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1343-1351

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1335-1342

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1326-1334

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1318-1325

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1310-1317

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1300-1309

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1291-1299

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1282-1290

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1276-1281

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1267-1275

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1266

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1256-1265

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1246-1255

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1236-1245

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1229-1235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1218-1128

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1210-1217

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1202-1209

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1197-1201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1190-1196

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1182-1189

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1174-1181

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1168-1173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1159-1167

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1151-1158

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1145-1150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1139-1144

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1131-1138

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1122-1130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1112-1121

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1101-1111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1091-1100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1082-1090

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1073-1081

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1066-1073

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1058-1065

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1048-1057

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1041-1047

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1033-1040

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1023-1032

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1017-1022

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1010-1016

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1001-1009

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 993-1000

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 984-992

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 977-983

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 970-976

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 963-969

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 955-962

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 946-954

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 938-945

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-937

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 793-799

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-792

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 777-784

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 769-776

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 759-768

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 751-758

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 745-750

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 738-744

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 732-737

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 727-731

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 720-726

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 713-719

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 705-712

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 695-704

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 685-694

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-684

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 668-674

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 660-667

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 651-659

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 644-650

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 637-643

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 629-636

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 617-628

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 608-616

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 575-584

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 565-574

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 556-564

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 1394, February 7, 2020, Story 1: Solid January 2020 Jobs Report: 225,000 New Non-farm Payroll Jobs Created in January and Labor Participation Rate Increased to 63.4% with Over 729,000 New Participants in Labor Force! — Videos — Story 2: U.S. Federal Budgetary Deficits, The National Debt and The Big Four Federal Spending: Social Security, Medicare, Defense and Medicaid — Videos — Story 3: President Trump Answers Big Lie Media Mob Question on Way To North Carolina  — Trump Derangement Syndrome of REDS (Radical Extremist Democratic Socialists) in Congress — Videos

Posted on February 9, 2020. Filed under: 2020 Democrat Candidates, 2020 President Candidates, 2020 Republican Candidates, Addiction, Addiction, Addiction, American History, Bank Fraud, Banking System, Bernie Sanders, Blogroll, Breaking News, Bribery, Bribes, Budgetary Policy, Cartoons, Clinton Obama Democrat Criminal Conspiracy, Communications, Computers, Congress, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Currencies, Deep State, Defense Spending, Disasters, Diseases, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Drugs, Economics, Education, Elections, Elizabeth Warren, Empires, Employment, Energy, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Government, Fifth Amendment, First Amendment, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Fraud, Free Trade, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, Health, Health Care, Health Care Insurance, History, House of Representatives, Human Behavior, Illegal Drugs, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Independence, Labor Economics, Language, Law, Legal Drugs, Lying, Medicare, Military Spending, Monetary Policy, Movies, National Interest, National Security Agency, News, Obesity, Overweight, People, Pete Buttigieg, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, President Trump, Progressives, Public Corruption, Public Relations, Public Sector Unions, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Resources, Scandals, Second Amendment, Senate, Social Science, Social Security, Spying, Subversion, Success, Surveillance and Spying On American People, Tax Policy, Taxation, Taxes, Trade Policy, U.S. Dollar, Unemployment, United States Constitution, United States of America, United States Supreme Court, Videos, Violence, War, Wealth, Weapons, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

 

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 1394 February 7, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1393 February 6, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1392 February 5, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1391 February 4, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1390 February 3, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1389 January 31, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1388 January 30, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1387 January 29, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1386 January 28, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1385 January 27, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1384 January 24, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1383 January 23, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1382 January 22, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1381 January 21, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1380 January 17, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1379 January 16, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1378 January 15, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1377 January 14, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1376 January 13, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1375 December 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1374 December 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1373 December 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1372 December 10, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1371 December 9, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1370 December 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1369 December 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1368 December 4, 2019 

Pronk Pops Show 1367 December 3, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1366 December 2, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1365 November 22, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1364 November 21, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1363 November 20, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1362 November 19, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1361 November 18, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1360 November 15, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1359 November 14, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1358 November 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1357 November 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1356 November 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1355 November 8, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1354 November 7, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1353 November 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1352 November 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1351 November 4, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1350 November 1, 2019

;

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

 

See the source image

 

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

 

Story 1: Solid January 2020 Jobs Report: 225,000 New Non-farm Payroll Jobs Created in January and Labor Participation Rate Increased to 63.4% with Over 729,000 New Participants in Labor Force! — Videos —

Alternate Unemployment Charts

The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.

The U-3 unemployment rate is the monthly headline number. The U-6 unemployment rate is the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) broadest unemployment measure, including short-term discouraged and other marginally-attached workers as well as those forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment.

 

Public Commentary on Unemployment

Unemployment Data Series   subcription required(Subscription required.)  View  Download Excel CSV File   Last Updated: February 7th, 2020

The ShadowStats Alternate Unemployment Rate for January 2020 is 21.0%.

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

Watch five experts break down the January jobs report

Outstanding January job report exceeds expectations with 225K jobs added

Kudlow: The economy is booming and jobs are booming

US economy adds 225,000 jobs in January

Mnuchin: We need to grow the economy faster than government spending

U.S. National Debt Clock

https://www.usdebtclock.org/

Will our national debt doom America?

Keiser Report: Economic Ghouls and Predators (E1498)

Keiser Report: All Rescue Roads Lead to the Elite (E1492)

US budget deficit tops $1 trillion as government spending increasesUS budget deficit tops $1 trillion as government spending increases

]

U.S. CBO Doesn’t Expect Economic Growth to Solve Deficit ‘Problem’

Deficits & Debts: Crash Course Economics #9

Deficits and debt | AP Macroeconomics | Khan Academy

63.4%: Labor Force Participation at Trump-Era High As Labor Force Grows by 574,000

By Susan Jones | February 7, 2020 | 8:03am EST

President Donald Trump never misses an opportunity to plug the strong employment picture for which he takes credit, and today he earned more bragging rights:

The Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics said the economy created 225,000 in January, well above estimates. BLS says notable job gains occurred in construction, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing.

The number of employed Americans dipped in January to 158,714,000 — down 89,000 from December’s record high.

The unemployment rate ticked up a tenth of a point to 3.6 percent in January.

But the labor force participation rate reached a Trump-era high of 63.4 percent, up from 63.2 percent in December, because the civilian labor force increased by 574,000 in January, after accounting for annual adjustments to population controls, BLS said.*

In January, the civilian non-institutional population in the United States was 259,502,000. That included all people 16 and older who did not live in an institution (such as a prison, nursing home or long-term care facility).

Of that civilian non-institutional population, 164,606,000 were participating in the labor force, meaning that they either had a job or were actively seeking one during the last month. This resulted in a labor force participation rate of 63.4 percent, the highest it’s been since June 2013.

The number of Americans counted as not in the labor force — meaning they did not have a job and were not looking for one — dropped by 442,000 in January (after population control adjustments). This number hovers around 95,000,000, partly because of retiring baby boomers.

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (3.3 percent), adult women (3.2 percent), teenagers (12.2 percent), Whites (3.1 percent), Blacks (6.0 percent), Asians (3.0 percent), and Hispanics (4.3 percent) showed little or no change over the month.

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for November was revised up by 5,000 from +256,000 to +261,000, and the change for December was revised up by 2,000 from +145,000 to +147,000. With these revisions, employment gains in November and December combined were 7,000 higher than previously reported.

In January, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by 7 cents to $28.44. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.1 percent.

The current economic expansion, now in its 11th year, became the longest in U.S. history on July 1, 2019, beating the previous record that lasted from March 1991 through March 2001.

President Trump bragged about the economy Tuesday night in his State of the Union speech:

In just over two years since the election, we have launched an unprecedented economic boom — a boom that has rarely been seen before.  There’s been nothing like it.  We have created 5.3 million new jobs and, importantly, added 600,000 new manufacturing jobs — something which almost everyone said was impossible to do.  But the fact is, we are just getting started.

Wages are rising at the fastest pace in decades and growing for blue-collar workers, who I promised to fight for.  They’re growing faster than anyone else thought possible.  Nearly 5 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps. The U.S. economy is growing almost twice as fast today as when I took office.  And we are considered, far and away, the hottest economy anywhere in the world.  Not even close.

Unemployment has reached the lowest rate in over half a century. African American, Hispanic American, and Asian American unemployment have all reached their lowest levels ever recorded. Unemployment for Americans with disabilities has also reached an all-time low. More people are working now than at any time in the history of our country — 157 million people at work.

*(BLS explained that the January 2020 data includes updated population estimates developed by the Census Bureau’s household survey. “Each year,” BLS said, “the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population since the previous decennial census. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics, and estimation methodology improvements.”)

https://cnsnews.com/article/national/susan-jones/634-labor-force-participation-trump-era-high

 

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this news release is embargoed until		USDL-20-0180
8:30 a.m. (EST) Friday, February 7, 2020

Technical information: 
 Household data:	(202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data:	(202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:		(202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov


		        THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- JANUARY 2020


Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 225,000 in January, and the unemployment rate
was little changed at 3.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.
Notable job gains occurred in construction, in health care, and in transportation and
warehousing. 

This news release presents statistics from two monthly surveys. The household survey
measures labor force status, including unemployment, by demographic characteristics.
The establishment survey measures nonfarm employment, hours, and earnings by industry.
For more information about the concepts and statistical methodology used in these two
surveys, see the Technical Note.
		 
 ___________________________________________________________________________________
| 									            |
|                Changes to The Employment Situation Data		            |
|									            |
|   Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual           |
|   benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. In        |
|   addition, several changes have been made to household survey data, including    |
|   the annual update of population estimates. See the notes at the end of the      |
|   news release for more information.                                              |
|___________________________________________________________________________________|


Household Survey Data

Both the unemployment rate, at 3.6 percent, and the number of unemployed persons, at
5.9 million, changed little in January. (See table A-1. For information about annual
population adjustments to the household survey estimates, see the note at the end of
the news release and tables B and C.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (3.3 percent), 
adult women (3.2 percent), teenagers (12.2 percent), Whites (3.1 percent), Blacks
(6.0 percent), Asians (3.0 percent), and Hispanics (4.3 percent) showed little or
no change over the month. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

Among the unemployed, the number of reentrants to the labor force increased by
183,000 in January to 1.8 million but was little changed over the year. (Reentrants
are persons who previously worked but were not in the labor force prior to beginning
their job search.) (See table A-11.)

The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more), at 1.2 million,
was unchanged in January. These individuals accounted for 19.9 percent of the unemployed.
(See table A-12.)

After accounting for the annual adjustments to the population controls, the civilian
labor force rose by 574,000 in January, and the labor force participation rate edged 
up by 0.2 percentage point to 63.4 percent. The employment-population ratio, at 61.2
percent, changed little over the month but was up by 0.5 percentage point over the year.
(See table A-1. For additional information about the effects of the population adjustments,
see table C.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons, at 4.2 million, was
essentially unchanged in January. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time
employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were
unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.)

The number of persons marginally attached to the labor force, at 1.3 million, changed
little in January. These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available
for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted
as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey
for a variety of reasons, such as belief that no jobs are available for them (referred
to as discouraged workers), school attendance, or family responsibilities. Discouraged
workers numbered 337,000 in January, little changed over the month. (See Summary table A.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 225,000 in January, compared with an
average monthly gain of 175,000 in 2019. Notable job gains occurred in construction,
in health care, and in transportation and warehousing. (See table B-1. For information
about the annual benchmark process, see the note at the end of the news release and table A.)

In January, construction employment rose by 44,000. Most of the gain occurred in specialty
trade contractors, with increases in both the residential (+18,000) and nonresidential
(+17,000) components. Construction added an average of 12,000 jobs per month in 2019. 

Health care added 36,000 jobs in January, with gains in ambulatory health care services
(+23,000) and hospitals (+10,000). Health care has added 361,000 jobs over the past 12 months. 

Employment in transportation and warehousing increased by 28,000 in January. Job gains
occurred in couriers and messengers (+14,000) and in warehousing and storage (+6,000).
Over the year, employment in transportation and warehousing has increased by 106,000. 

Employment in leisure and hospitality continued to trend up in January (+36,000). Over
the past 6 months, the industry has added 288,000 jobs. 

Employment continued on an upward trend in professional and business services in January
(+21,000), increasing by 390,000 over the past 12 months. 

Manufacturing employment changed little in January (-12,000) and has shown little movement,
on net, over the past 12 months. Motor vehicles and parts lost 11,000 jobs over the month. 

Employment in other major industries, including mining, wholesale trade, retail trade,
information, financial activities, and government, changed little over the month.

In January, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls rose by
7 cents to $28.44. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by
3.1 percent. Average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees
were $23.87 in January, little changed over the month (+3 cents). (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was unchanged at 34.3
hours in January. In manufacturing, the average workweek remained at 40.4 hours, while
overtime edged down 0.1 hour to 3.1 hours. The average workweek of private-sector production
and nonsupervisory employees edged up by 0.1 hour to 33.6 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for November was revised up by 5,000 from
+256,000 to +261,000, and the change for December was revised up by 2,000 from +145,000 to
+147,000. With these revisions, employment gains in November and December combined were
7,000 higher than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports
received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from
the recalculation of seasonal factors. The annual benchmark process also contributed to the
November and December revisions.) After revisions, job gains have averaged 211,000 over the
last 3 months. 

_____________
The Employment Situation for February is scheduled to be released on
Friday, March 6, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. (EST).


 ____________________________________________________________________________________
|										     |
|                     Changes to Household Survey Data 				     |
|										     |
|   Effective with this news release, two not seasonally adjusted series previously  |
|   displayed in Summary table A--persons marginally attached to the labor force and |
|   discouraged workers--have been replaced with new seasonally adjusted series. The |
|   new seasonally adjusted series are available in the BLS online database back to  |
|   1994. Not seasonally adjusted data for persons marginally attached to the labor  |
|   force and for discouraged workers will continue to be published in table A-16.   |
|   These series are also available in the BLS online database back to 1994.         |
|                                                                                    |
|   Persons marginally attached to the labor force and discouraged workers are       |
|   inputs into three alternative measures of labor underutilization displayed in    |
|   table A-15. Effective with this news release, data for U-4, U-5, and U-6 in      |
|   table A-15 reflect the new seasonally adjusted series. Changes to historical     |
|   data were negligible. Revised data back to 1994 are available in the BLS online  |
|   database. Not seasonally adjusted series for the alternative measures are        |
|   unaffected.									     |
|										     |
|   Effective with data for January 2020, occupation estimates in table A-13         |
|   reflect the introduction of the 2018 Census occupation classification system     |
|   into the household survey. This occupation classification system is derived      |
|   from the 2018 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system. Historical      |
|   data have not been revised. Beginning with data for January 2020, occupation     |
|   estimates are not strictly comparable with earlier years.                        |
|                                                                                    |
|   In addition, industry estimates in table A-14 reflect the introduction of the    |
|   2017 Census industry classification system, which is derived from the 2017       | 
|   North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The classification        |
|   changes are minor and do not involve re-classification of industries between     |
|   the broader industry sectors.                                                    |
|										     |
|   Beginning with data for January 2020, marital status estimates are not strictly  |
|   comparable with earlier years. Estimates of married persons now refer to those   |
|   in opposite-sex and same-sex marriages. Prior to January 2020, these estimates   |
|   referred only to those in opposite-sex marriages. Persons with a same-sex	     |
|   spouse were previously classified in other marital status categories, such as    |
|   "women who maintain families." These changes affect marital status estimates in  |
|   tables A-9 and A-10. (Note that not all marital status categories are presented  |
|   in these tables. BLS has not separately tabulated estimates for persons with an  |
|   opposite-sex spouse and persons with a same-sex spouse.) Historical data have    |
|   not been revised.						                     |
|____________________________________________________________________________________|


                     Revisions to Establishment Survey Data


In accordance with annual practice, the establishment survey data released today
have been benchmarked to reflect comprehensive counts of payroll jobs for March 2019.
These counts are derived principally from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages
(QCEW), which counts jobs covered by the Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax system. The
benchmark process results in revisions to not seasonally adjusted data from April 2018
forward. BLS revised seasonally adjusted data from January 2015 forward. In addition,
both seasonally adjusted and unadjusted data for some series incorporate other
revisions prior to 2015.  

The total nonfarm employment level for March 2019 was revised downward by 514,000
(-505,000 on a not seasonally adjusted basis), or -0.3 percent. The absolute average
benchmark revision over the past 10 years is 0.2 percent. 

The over-the-year change in total nonfarm employment for 2019 was revised from 
+2,108,000 to +2,096,000 (seasonally adjusted). Table A presents revised total nonfarm
employment data on a seasonally adjusted basis from January to December 2019.

All revised historical establishment survey data are available on the BLS website at
www.bls.gov/ces/data/home.htm. In addition, an article that discusses the benchmark
and post-benchmark revisions and other technical issues is available at
www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesbmart.htm.


Table A. Revisions to total nonfarm employment, January to December 2019, seasonally
adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 |                                   |                                
                 |                Level              |      Over-the-month change     
                 |---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Year and month  |           |    As     |           |           |    As    |           
                 |    As     |previously | Difference|    As     |previously| Difference
                 |  revised  |published  |           |  revised  |published |           
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 |           |           |           |           |          |           
       2019      |           |           |           |           |          |           
                 |           |           |           |           |          |           
January......... |  150,134  |  150,587  |    -453   |    269    |    312   |   -43
February........ |  150,135  |  150,643  |    -508   |      1    |     56   |   -55
March........... |  150,282  |  150,796  |    -514   |    147    |    153   |    -6
April........... |  150,492  |  151,012  |    -520   |    210    |    216   |    -6
May............. |  150,577  |  151,074  |    -497   |     85    |     62   |    23
June............ |  150,759  |  151,252  |    -493   |    182    |    178   |     4
July............ |  150,953  |  151,418  |    -465   |    194    |    166   |    28
August.......... |  151,160  |  151,637  |    -477   |    207    |    219   |   -12
September....... |  151,368  |  151,830  |    -462   |    208    |    193   |    15
October......... |  151,553  |  151,982  |    -429   |    185    |    152   |    33
November........ |  151,814  |  152,238  |    -424   |    261    |    256   |     5
December(p)..... |  151,961  |  152,383  |    -422   |    147    |    145   |     2 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   (p) = preliminary.


                Adjustments to Population Estimates for the Household Survey


Effective with data for January 2020, updated population estimates were incorporated into
the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the
U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new
information and assumptions about the growth of the population since the previous decennial
census. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from adjustments
for net international migration, updated vital statistics, and estimation methodology
improvements. 

In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates
for December 2019 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustments,
however, differences in selected December 2019 labor force series based on the old and new
population estimates are shown in table B.

The adjustments decreased the estimated size of the civilian noninstitutional population in
December by 811,000, the civilian labor force by 524,000, employment by 507,000, and
unemployment by 17,000. The number of persons not in the labor force was decreased by 287,000.
The total unemployment rate, employment-population ratio, and labor force participation rate
were unaffected.

Data users are cautioned that these annual population adjustments can affect the comparability
of household data series over time. Table C shows the effect of the introduction of new
population estimates on the comparison of selected labor force measures between December 2019
and January 2020. Additional information on the population adjustments and their effect on
national labor force estimates is available at
www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cps-pop-control-adjustments.pdf. 

Population controls for veterans, which are derived from a Department of Veterans Affairs' 
population model and are updated periodically, have also been updated with the release of
data for January 2020. Historical data have not been revised.
Table B. Effect of the updated population controls on December 2019 estimates by sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, not seasonally adjusted
(Numbers in thousands)
Category Total Men Women White Black or
African
Ameri-
can
Asian Hispanic or
Latino
ethnicity

Civilian noninstitutional population

-811 -403 -408 -461 -59 -273 -323

Civilian labor force

-524 -289 -235 -297 -41 -171 -219

Participation rate

0 0 0 0 0 0 -0.1

Employed

-507 -279 -227 -287 -39 -167 -210

Employment-population ratio

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Unemployed

-17 -10 -9 -10 -2 -4 -9

Unemployment rate

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Not in labor force

-287 -115 -172 -164 -18 -102 -104

NOTE: Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Estimates for the above race groups (White, Black or African American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented for all races. Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race.

Table C. December 2019-January 2020 changes in selected labor force measures, with adjustments for population control effects
(Numbers in thousands)
Category Dec.-Jan.
change, as
published
2020
population
control effect
Dec.-Jan. change, after
removing the
population control
effect(1)

Civilian noninstitutional population

-679 -811 132

Civilian labor force

50 -524 574

Participation rate

0.2 0 0.2

Employed

-89 -507 418

Employment-population ratio

0.2 0 0.2

Unemployed

139 -17 156

Unemployment rate

0.1 0 0.1

Not in labor force

-729 -287 -442

(1) This Dec.-Jan. change is calculated by subtracting the population control effect from the over-the-month change in the published seasonally adjusted estimates.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

 

Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted

HOUSEHOLD DATA
Summary table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
[Numbers in thousands]
Category Jan.
2019
Nov.
2019
Dec.
2019
Jan.
2020
Change from:
Dec.
2019-
Jan.
2020

Employment status

Civilian noninstitutional population

258,239 260,020 260,181 259,502

Civilian labor force

163,142 164,347 164,556 164,606

Participation rate

63.2 63.2 63.2 63.4

Employed

156,627 158,536 158,803 158,714

Employment-population ratio

60.7 61.0 61.0 61.2

Unemployed

6,516 5,811 5,753 5,892

Unemployment rate

4.0 3.5 3.5 3.6

Not in labor force

95,097 95,673 95,625 94,896

Unemployment rates

Total, 16 years and over

4.0 3.5 3.5 3.6

Adult men (20 years and over)

3.7 3.2 3.1 3.3

Adult women (20 years and over)

3.6 3.2 3.2 3.2

Teenagers (16 to 19 years)

12.9 12.0 12.6 12.2

White

3.5 3.2 3.2 3.1

Black or African American

6.8 5.6 5.9 6.0

Asian

3.1 2.6 2.5 3.0

Hispanic or Latino ethnicity

4.8 4.2 4.2 4.3

Total, 25 years and over

3.2 2.9 2.8 2.9

Less than a high school diploma

5.7 5.3 5.2 5.5

High school graduates, no college

3.7 3.7 3.7 3.8

Some college or associate degree

3.4 2.9 2.7 2.8

Bachelor’s degree and higher

2.4 2.0 1.9 2.0

Reason for unemployment

Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs

3,060 2,804 2,686 2,665

Job leavers

816 776 829 836

Reentrants

1,944 1,663 1,655 1,838

New entrants

607 581 551 557

Duration of unemployment

Less than 5 weeks

2,319 2,026 2,065 2,059

5 to 14 weeks

1,999 1,753 1,730 1,755

15 to 26 weeks

898 865 812 887

27 weeks and over

1,259 1,219 1,186 1,166

Employed persons at work part time

Part time for economic reasons

5,105 4,288 4,148 4,182

Slack work or business conditions

3,402 2,634 2,657 2,655

Could only find part-time work

1,413 1,259 1,215 1,294

Part time for noneconomic reasons

20,984 21,532 21,586 22,154

Persons not in the labor force

Marginally attached to the labor force

1,498 1,244 1,230 1,342

Discouraged workers

418 316 289 337

– December – January changes in household data are not shown due to the introduction of updated population controls.
NOTE: Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race. Detail for the seasonally adjusted data shown in this table will not necessarily add to totals because of the independent seasonal adjustment of the various series. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

 

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm

Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted

ESTABLISHMENT DATA
Summary table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Category Jan.
2019
Nov.
2019
Dec.
2019(P)
Jan.
2020(P)

EMPLOYMENT BY SELECTED INDUSTRY
(Over-the-month change, in thousands)

Total nonfarm

269 261 147 225

Total private

258 247 142 206

Goods-producing

75 45 -5 32

Mining and logging

5 -11 -11 0

Construction

50 -2 11 44

Manufacturing

20 58 -5 -12

Durable goods(1)

21 45 -1 -11

Motor vehicles and parts

-0.3 40.5 1.3 -10.6

Nondurable goods

-1 13 -4 -1

Private service-providing

183 202 147 174

Wholesale trade

6.3 3.0 9.5 8.4

Retail trade

-7.9 -13.9 44.9 -8.3

Transportation and warehousing

46.8 22.6 3.9 28.3

Utilities

0.1 1.0 0.7 -1.4

Information

-11 9 8 5

Financial activities

11 12 5 -1

Professional and business services(1)

-2 37 14 21

Temporary help services

-28.2 2.6 5.9 -1.5

Education and health services(1)

56 73 22 72

Health care and social assistance

37.6 56.7 25.0 47.2

Leisure and hospitality

81 43 36 36

Other services

3 16 3 14

Government

11 14 5 19

(3-month average change, in thousands)

Total nonfarm

195 218 198 211

Total private

188 211 193 198

WOMEN AND PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES
AS A PERCENT OF ALL EMPLOYEES(2)

Total nonfarm women employees

49.7 50.0 50.0 50.0

Total private women employees

48.3 48.6 48.7 48.7

Total private production and nonsupervisory employees

82.4 82.2 82.2 82.2

HOURS AND EARNINGS
ALL EMPLOYEES

Total private

Average weekly hours

34.5 34.3 34.3 34.3

Average hourly earnings

$27.58 $28.34 $28.37 $28.44

Average weekly earnings

$951.51 $972.06 $973.09 $975.49

Index of aggregate weekly hours (2007=100)(3)

110.5 111.2 111.3 111.5

Over-the-month percent change

0.2 -0.1 0.1 0.2

Index of aggregate weekly payrolls (2007=100)(4)

145.8 150.7 151.0 151.6

Over-the-month percent change

0.4 0.3 0.2 0.4

DIFFUSION INDEX
(Over 1-month span)(5)

Total private (258 industries)

62.2 63.4 55.6 59.7

Manufacturing (76 industries)

59.2 61.8 46.1 46.7

Footnotes
(1) Includes other industries, not shown separately.
(2) Data relate to production employees in mining and logging and manufacturing, construction employees in construction, and nonsupervisory employees in the service-providing industries.
(3) The indexes of aggregate weekly hours are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate hours by the corresponding annual average aggregate hours.
(4) The indexes of aggregate weekly payrolls are calculated by dividing the current month’s estimates of aggregate weekly payrolls by the corresponding annual average aggregate weekly payrolls.
(5) Figures are the percent of industries with employment increasing plus one-half of the industries with unchanged employment, where 50 percent indicates an equal balance between industries with increasing and decreasing employment.
(P) Preliminary

NOTE: Data have been revised to reflect March 2019 benchmark levels and updated seasonal adjustment factors.

 

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.b.htm

Story 2: U.S. Federal Budgetary Deficits, The National Debt and The Big Four Federal Spending: Social Security, Medicare, Defense and Medicaid — Videos

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

See the source image

Reorganizing the Federal Government: What Needs to Be Done and How to Do It

John Stossel – Downsizing Government

Aug 25, 2015

Story 3: President Trump Answers Big Lie Media Mob Question on Way To North Carolina  — Trump Derangement Syndrome of REDS (Radical Extremist Democratic Socialists) in Congress — Videos

Trump: They should expunge impeachment in the House, it was a ‘hoax’

 

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1392-1394

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1386-1391

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1379-1785

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1372-1378

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1363-1371

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1352-1362

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1343-1351

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1335-1342

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1326-1334

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1318-1325

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1310-1317

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1300-1309

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1291-1299

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1282-1290

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1276-1281

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1267-1275

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1266

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1256-1265

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1246-1255

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1236-1245

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1229-1235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1218-1128

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1210-1217

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1202-1209

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1197-1201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1190-1196

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1182-1189

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1174-1181

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1168-1173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1159-1167

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1151-1158

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1145-1150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1139-1144

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1131-1138

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1122-1130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1112-1121

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1101-1111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1091-1100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1082-1090

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1073-1081

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1066-1073

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1058-1065

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1048-1057

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1041-1047

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1033-1040

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1023-1032

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1017-1022

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1010-1016

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1001-1009

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 993-1000

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 984-992

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 977-983

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 970-976

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 963-969

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 955-962

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 946-954

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 938-945

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-937

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 793-799

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-792

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 777-784

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 769-776

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 759-768

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 751-758

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 745-750

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 738-744

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 732-737

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 727-731

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 720-726

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 713-719

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 705-712

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 695-704

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 685-694

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-684

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 668-674

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 660-667

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 651-659

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 644-650

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 637-643

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 629-636

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 617-628

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 608-616

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 575-584

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 565-574

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 556-564

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 1393, February 6, 2020, Story 1: President Trump Speaks At National Prayer Breakfast — Slams Pelosi and Romney For Using Their Faith To Justify Their Actions — Faith Based Adoption — Videos — Story 2: President Trump Acquitted Forever By Senate Takes A Well Deserved Victory Lap Over Failed Coup Attempts By Clinton Obama Democratic Criminal Conspiracy — Nobody Including Democrats Are Above The Law — American People Demanding The Indictments of The Conspirators — The Trump Way — Videos — Story 3: DNC Chair Demands Iowa Recheck The Vote Count and Bernie Sanders Won By More Than 8,000 — Videos

Posted on February 7, 2020. Filed under: 2020 Democrat Candidates, 2020 President Candidates, 2020 Republican Candidates, Abortion, Addiction, Addiction, Addiction, American History, Banking System, Barack H. Obama, Bernie Sanders, Bill Clinton, Bombs, Breaking News, Bribery, Bribes, Budgetary Policy, Business, Cartoons, Center for Disease Control, Central Intelligence Agency, Clinton Obama Democrat Criminal Conspiracy, Coal, Communications, Congress, Constitutional Law, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Cruise Missiles, Culture, Deep State, Defense Spending, Disasters, Diseases, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Drones, Drugs, Eating, Economics, Economics, Education, Elections, Elizabeth Warren, Empires, Employment, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Government, Fifth Amendment, Fiscal Policy, Flu, Foreign Policy, Former President Barack Obama, Fourth Amendment, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, Health, Health Care Insurance, High Crimes, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton, History, House of Representatives, Human, Human Behavior, Hypersonic Missiles, Illegal Drugs, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Impeachment, Independence, Investments, James Comey, Law, Life, Lying, Media, Medicare, Mental Illness, Mike Pence, Monetary Policy, National Interest, National Security Agency, Natural Gas, News, Nuclear, Nutrition, Obama, Oil, Pete Buttigieg, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Trump, Pro Abortion, Pro Life, Progressives, Public Corruption, Public Relations, Radio, Regulation, Religion, Resources, Robert S. Mueller III, Rule of Law, Rush Limbaugh, Scandals, Second Amendment, Security, Senate, Social Sciences, Social Security, Spying, Spying on American People, Subornation of perjury, Subversion, Success, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP_, Surveillance and Spying On American People, Surveillance/Spying, Taxation, Terror, Terrorism, Treason, Trump Surveillance/Spying, U.S. Negotiations with Islamic Republic of Iran, Ukraine, Unemployment, United States Constitution, United States of America, United States Supreme Court, Videos, Violence, War, Water, Wealth, Weapons, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 1393 February 6, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1392 February 5, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1391 February 4, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1390 February 3, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1389 January 31, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1388 January 30, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1387 January 29, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1386 January 28, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1385 January 27, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1384 January 24, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1383 January 23, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1382 January 22, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1381 January 21, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1380 January 17, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1379 January 16, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1378 January 15, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1377 January 14, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1376 January 13, 2020

Pronk Pops Show 1375 December 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1374 December 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1373 December 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1372 December 10, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1371 December 9, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1370 December 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1369 December 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1368 December 4, 2019 

Pronk Pops Show 1367 December 3, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1366 December 2, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1365 November 22, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1364 November 21, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1363 November 20, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1362 November 19, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1361 November 18, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1360 November 15, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1359 November 14, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1358 November 13, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1357 November 12, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1356 November 11, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1355 November 8, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1354 November 7, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1353 November 6, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1352 November 5, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1351 November 4, 2019

Pronk Pops Show 1350 November 1, 2019

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

See the source imageSee the source imageSee the source imageSee the source image

Story 2: President Trump Acquitted Forever By Senate Takes A Well Deserved Victory Lap Over Failed Coup Attempts By Clinton Obama Democratic Criminal Conspiracy — Nobody Including Democrats Are Above The Law — American People Demanding The Indictments of The Conspirators — The Trump Way — Videos —

See the source imageSee the source image

President Trump Delivers Remarks

President Trump delivers remarks at White House | USA TODAY

‘The Five’ on Trump taking marathon victory lap after his acquittal

 

This linguist studied the way Trump speaks for two years. Here’s what she found.

Keiser Report: Canceling Debt to Avoid Economic Crisis (E1320)

Ep. 1548 David Stockman on Impeachment, the Democrats, the Fed, and More

 

Triumphant Trump lashes out ‘horrible person’ Pelosi and attacks ‘dirty cops’ in wild post-acquittal speech as he slams ‘Mueller top scum’ Russia probe and ‘evil’ impeachment as ‘all bulls**t’

  • President Trump gathered his political allies in the White House’s East Room Thursday to celebrate being acquitted on impeachment charges
  • Trump held up a copy of the Washington Post that said ‘Trump Acquitted’ in large font, saying it’s the ‘only good headline I’ve ever had in the Washington Post’ 
  • At the top of his speech, Trump called out the ‘leakers and liars’ and then name-dropped former FBI Director James Comey 
  • He bad-mouthed a number of individuals including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, GOP Sen. Mitt Romney and Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff 
  • He again went after FBI lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, while also slamming Hunter Biden and former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe
  • Then Trump went around the room and complimented the Republicans who supported him, giving brief remarks about each one 
  • Trump spoke for more than an hour and didn’t use a teleprompter, though used swear words more than once 
  • ‘This is a day of celebration because we went through hell,’ Trump told the crowd, who gave him a standing ovation 

President Trump celebrated his Senate acquittal on Thursday with a freewheeling speech at the White House where he blasted the ‘vicious and mean’ Democrats, attacked ‘evil and dirty’ cops, thanked his ‘very good friends’ for their support and apologized to his family for what he put them through.

‘This is a day of celebration because we went through hell,’ he told a packed room of about 200 supporters in the East Room of the White House.

The president spoke – without the use of a teleprompter – for a little more than hour that veered back and forth between thanking his allies and blasting his enemies.

He began his remarks with his favorite hit term on the investigations into him and his presidency: ‘witch hunt.’

‘We’ve been going through this now for over three years. It was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops. It was a leakers and lawyers. This should never happen to another president, ever. I don’t know that other presidents would have been able to take it,’ he said.

And he ended with an apology to his family, including young son Barron.

‘I want to apologize to my family for having them have to go through a phony, rotten deal by some very evil and sick people,’ he said. ‘And Ivanka is here, my sons, my whole family. And that includes Barron. He’s up there, he’s a young boy.’

Ivanka left her seat in the audience to come up to the podium and hug her father after his apology. First lady Melania Trump did the same.

‘I just want to thank my family for sticking through it. This was not part of the deal,’ the president said.

Trump also name-dropped those he blamed for impeaching him, re-upping his litany of attacks against the same people he has blamed since the first investigation of his presidency started.

Former FBI Director James Comey was the first opponent who came up.

‘Had I not fired James Comey – who was a disaster, by the way – it’s possible I may not have even been standing here right now,’ Trump said. ‘When I fired that sleazebag, all hell broke out,’ he later added.

He blamed the top FBI officials for his problems. ‘It was the top scum, and the FBI people don’t like the top scum,’ he said.

The president also had choice words for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff, Sen. Mitt Romney, Hunter Biden, former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe – and the FBI lovers, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

SCROLL DOWN TO READ TRUMP’S FREEWHEELING SPEECH IN FULL 

President Trump hoisted up a copy of the Washington Post in the East Room Thursday, marveling at the paper's good headline

President Trump hugs his daughter Ivanka Trump at his victory speech in the White House's East Room Thursday

President Trump hugs his daughter Ivanka Trump at his victory speech in the White House’s East Room Thursday

First lady Melania Trump (left) kisses President Trump (right) at the end of his speech Thursday in the East Room

First lady Melania Trump (left) kisses President Trump (right) at the end of his speech Thursday in the East Room

The president, showing off the 'Trump acquitted' headline, said he might even frame this copy of the Washington Post

President Trump addressed a crowd of allies at the White House Thursday after being acquitted by the U.S. Senate

President Trump was surrounded by his political allies at the White House Thursday as he took a victory lap on being acquitted on impeachment charges by the GOP-led Senate

President Trump went around the room and complimented his political allies, while describing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as 'vicious' and 'horrible' x

President Trump (left) had first lady Melania Trump (right) come onstage at the conclusion of his hour-long, free-wheeling speech where he talked about impeachment

Ivanka Trump (right) listens to her father President Trump (left) speak a day after the conclusion of the Senate's impeachment trial

Comey’s May 2017 firing led to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller who took over the Russian interference probe.

The president referred to the Russia probe as ‘all bulls***’ to the East Room crowd.

That investigation wasn’t directly related to why Trump was impeached – over a scheme to hold up around $400 million in military aid to Ukraine in order to pressure the president to announce investigations into Joe and Hunter Biden.

Trump attacked the former vice president’s son for his work on the board of a Ukrainian gas company and for a Chinese hedge fund. He also reiterated his argument his July 25 phone call with newly-elected Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was perfect.

‘He’s a new president, seems like a very nice person, by the way. His whole thing was corruption. He’s going to stop corruption. We have a treaty, a signed treaty that we will work together to root out corruption in Ukraine. I probably have a legal obligation … to report corruption. They don’t even think a corrupt way son who made no money, that got thrown out of the military, that had no money at all, is working for $3 million upfront, $83,000 a month. And that’s only Ukraine. Then goes to China, picks up $1.5 billion. Then goes to Romania, I hear, and many other countries. They think that’s okay. Because, if it is, Ivanka in the audience? Boy, my kids could make a fortune,’ he said.

The East Room was filled with the president’s Republican Congressional and political allies. Lawmakers like Doug Collins, Jim Jordan, Elise Stefanik and Matt Gaetz, who all vocally defended the president during the House impeachment investigation. GOP senators who voted to acquit him were there too, including Chuck Grassley, Mike Lee and, of course, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Trump had personalized shout outs for many of them:

  • Mitch McConnell: ‘Great guy. Great guy. He’s a tough guy to read. I’m good at reading people. A tough guy to read.’
  • Jim Jordan: ‘When I first got to know Jim I said, “Huh, never wears a jacket. What the hell is going on?” He’s obviously very proud of his body. And they say where he works out with the congressmen, senators, they say when Jim works out, even though he’s not as young as he was, when he works out, the machine starts burning.’
  • Steve Scalise: ‘He got whacked, my Steve. Right? I went to the hospital with our great first lady that night. Right, honey? We saw a man who was not going to make it. He was not going to make it. The doctor — I told him, his wife, I said, “She loves you.” “Why did you say that?” Because she was devastated. A lot of wives wouldn’t give a damn.’ 
  • Elise Stefanik: ‘I didn’t realize, when she opens that mouth, you were killing them, Elise! You were killing them!’
  • John Ratcliffe: ‘If we were doing a remake of “Perry Mason,” the man I get — there is nobody in Hollywood like this.’ 
  • Matt Gaetz: ‘Sometimes controversial, but actually he’s not controversial. He’s solid as a rock and a friend of mine.’ 

The president’s impeachment legal team came in the room before Trump and was greeted with a standing ovation from the audience and shouts of ‘Bravo!’ 

Trump, too, was greeted by a crowd on its feet.

He held up a copy of the Washington Post in triumph as his supporters cheered him on.

‘It was the only good headline I’ve ever had in the Washington Post,’ Trump said, showing off a newspaper with the words ‘Trump acquitted’ in large typeface across the front. Trump said he might even frame it.

President Trump and Melania Trump leaving after his remarks

IN THE AUDIENCE: Reps. Doug Collins (center) and Elise Stefanik (right) were invited to attend Thursday's White House address by President Trump. Both lawmakers defended him during the impeachement saga

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell arrives at President Trump's East Room address Thursday

During the speech, the president praised certain Republican lawmakers who defended him, including Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York

Rep. Matt Gaetz is seen entering the Whtie House's East Room Thursday prior to President Trump addressing the nation on his impeachment acquittal

Rep. Matt Gaetz stands as he is acknowledged by President Trump during a speech that lasted longer than an hour

Rep. Matt Gaetz stands as he is acknowledged by President Trump during a speech that lasted longer than an hour

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham (center) greets Rep. Matt Gaetz (left) in the White House's East Room on Thursday

Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee who loudly defended President Trump during the impeachment hearings, wore a 'Quit, Mitt' button to the White House Thursday

Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway chats with White House guests before President Trump appeared in the East Room Thursday

Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney is photographed in the East Room before the president delivered remarks

Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney is photographed in the East Room before the president delivered remarks

Republican political allies filed the White House's audience Thursday including (from left) Rep. Mark Meadows, Sen. Bill Cassidy, Sen. Mike Lee, Sen. Chuck Grassley and Rep. Devin Nunes. Nunes is Rep. Adam Schiff's GOP counterpart in the House Intelligence Committee

First daughter and White House senior adviser Ivanka Trump reacts to her father's speech in the White House's East Room Thursday

Attendees of President Trump's East Room speech included (from left) second lady Karen Pence, Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Attorney General Bill Barr

Attendees of President Trump’s East Room speech included (from left) second lady Karen Pence, Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Attorney General Bill Barr

 

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham previewed the president's remarks on Fox News Channel Thursday morning

He had nicer things to say about those in the room.

TRUMP SHOUT OUTS

The president offered his thanks to many people during his remarks:

Melania Trump

Ivanka Trump

His sons and specifically Barron

Attorneys Pat Cipollone and Jay Sekulow

Sen. Tim Scott

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

Rep. Jim Jordan

Rep. Elise Stefanik

Rep. Mark Meadows

Rep. Doug Collins

Sen. Kelly Loeffler

Sen. Josh Hawley

Sen. Chuck Grassley

Rep. Louie Gohmert

Sen. Mike Braun

Sen. Bill Cassidy

Sen. John Barasso

Sen. Mike Lee

House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy

Sen. Kelly Armstrong

Rep. Jim Banks

Rep. Andy Biggs

Abraham Lincoln

Rep. Matt Gaetz

Rep. Debbie Lesko

Gov. Ron DeSantis

Rep. Mike Johnson

Rep. Devin Nunes

Rep. John Ratliffe

Rep. Steve Scalise

Matt Schlapp

Rep. Bradley Byrne

Rep. Scott Perry

Lee, a Republican senator from Utah, got some attention from the president, in part because Lee’s counterpart, Sen. Mitt Romney, had voted alongside Democrats on voting in support of one article of impeachment.

Trump told Lee to deliver a message to the people of Utah: ‘Tell them I’m sorry about Mitt Romney.’

‘We can say, by far, Mike Lee is the most popular senator in the state,’ Trump said.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Republican member of the House Judiciary Committee who also loudly backed the president during impeachment hearings, was spotted wearing a ‘quit Mitt’ button to the White House event.

Trump complimented another Judiciary Committee member, Rep. John Ratcliffe, for being straight out of Central Casting.

‘If we’re doing a remake of Perry Mason,’ he said, nodding at Ratcliffe. ‘There’s nobody in Hollywood like this.’

The president also suggested that Rep. Steve Scalise became more attractive after recovering from a gun shot wound.

‘You weren’t that good looking,’ Trump said. ‘You look good now.’

The president also talked of Scalise’s wife’s devotion to the Louisiana Republican, as Trump had met her when her husband was in the emergency room.

‘A lot of wives wouldn’t give a damn,’ Trump remarked.

Trump also made colorful comments about Rep. Jim Jordan, another prominent defender.

‘When I first got to know Jim I said, heh, he never wears a jacket, he’s obviously very proud of his body,’ the president said.

Jordan was a collegiate wrestling champion and later a college-level coach.

The Ohio Republican did wear a jacket to Trump’s speech Thursday.

Trump also asked lawmakers to stand up if they had something to say.

That prompted retiring Rep. Mark Meadows, a North Carolina Republican, to briefly stand and say, ‘This reflection today is a small reflection of the support you have.’

‘We got your back,’ Meadows said.

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham told a Fox News Channel audience Thursday what to expect from his remarks – that the president had previewed himself when he slammed Pelosi and Romney at the National Prayer Breakfast Thursday morning.

‘He is going to be honest,’ Grisham told Fox News, ‘going to speak with honesty and with humility and he and the family went through a lot. I think he’s also going to talk about just how horribly he was treated and, you know, that maybe people should pay for that.’

PEOPLE DONALD TRUMP CRITICIZED

The president also criticized many people in his speech:

Sen. Mitt Romney

Speaker Nancy Pelosi

Rep. Adam Schiff

Rep. Jerry Nadler

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand

Former FBI director James Comey

Former Sen. Claire McCaskill

Hunter Biden

Lisa Page

Peter Strzok

Andrew McCabe

Christopher Steele

Bob Mueller

Sen. Chuck Schumer

Hillary Clinton

‘People should be held accountable,’ she added.

The president went after Pelosi and Romney for using their faith to justify their actions in the impeachment process during his remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast.

And, in his remarks later that day in the East Wing, he stood by what he said at the breakfast.

‘I had Nancy Pelosi sitting four seats away and I’m saying things that a lot of people wouldn’t have said, but I meant everything. I meant every word of it,’ he said.

At the breakfast, the president did not mention the two by name but his meaning was clear.

‘I don’t like people who use their faith as justification for doing what they know is wrong. Nor do I like people who say I pray for you when they know that’s not so. So many people have been hurt, and we can’t let that go on. I will be discussing that a little bit later at the White House,’ he said.

Romney was the lone Republican to find Trump guilty on one article of impeachment: abuse of power. He said in his remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday that it was his faith – Romney is a devout Mormon – that led him to that decision.

Pelosi, a devout Catholic, has repeatedly said she prays for the president. She was seated at the head table during Trump’s remarks and shook her head at one point during them. She pursed her lips a few times as he spoke. The speaker launched the impeachment inquiry into the president in September.

Back at the White House, Trump had no problem uttering Pelosi’s name. He called her a ‘vicious horrible person’ and said that Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and one of the Democrats’ House impeachment managers, was a ‘horrible person.’

‘She may pray, but she prays for the opposite,’ Trump said of the speaker.

At the prayer breakfast, the president admitted he was having trouble liking his political enemies now that his impeachment trial is over.

‘We are grateful to the people of this room for the lovely show to religion, not one religion, but many religions. They are brave, they are brilliant, they are fighters, they like people and sometimes they hate people. I’m sorry. I apologize. I am trying to learn. Not easy. It’s not easy. When they impeach you for nothing, and you’re supposed to like them, it’s not easy, folks. I do my best,’ he said.

Donald Trump slammed Nancy Pelosi and Mitt Romney for using their faith to justify their actions in the impeachment trial and inquiry

Donald Trump slammed Nancy Pelosi and Mitt Romney for using their faith to justify their actions in the impeachment trial and inquiry

Speaker Nancy Pelosi sat on the opposite of the head table from President Trump

Speaker Nancy Pelosi sat on the opposite of the head table from President Trump

Speaker Pelosi sat grimed during President Trump's remarks

Speaker Pelosi sat grimed during President Trump’s remarks

President Trump addressed impeachment at the top of his remarks

Trump was acquitted on both articles of impeachment by the Senate on Wednesday, bringing to a close the fourth month, contentious process that led to a new level of bitter relations between the White House and congressional Democrats.

Harvard professor Arthur Brooks, in his key note address at the breakfast, urged those present not to hold political enemies in contempt, but to do as Jesus preached and ‘love your enemies.

‘I don’t know if I agree with you,’ Trump said to Brooks when it was his turn to speak. And then he proceeded to launch his attacks on Pelosi and Romney.

The president addressed the impeachment inquiry at the top of his remarks and, earlier, had triumphantly held up newspaper headlines announcing his acquittal. The audience cheered his move.

‘My family, our great country and your president has been put through a terrible ordeal by some very dishonest and corrupt people. They have done everything possible to destroy us and by so doing, very badly hurt our nation,’ Trump said.

‘They know what they are doing is wrong but they put themselves far ahead of our great country. Weeks ago and again yesterday, courageous Republican politicians and leaders had the wisdom, fortitude, and strength to do what everyone knows was right,’ he added.

The president and the speaker were meeting for the first time since the impeachment verdict at the National Prayer Breakfast Thursday morning.

Trump walked to the head table to applause and held up the front pages of USA Today and The Washington Post with their oversized headlines proclaiming his acquittal by the Senate.

‘Acquitted’ read USA Today. ‘Trump Acquitted’ was the Washington Post’s headline.

Pelosi stood and clapped as President Trump entered the room. She simply looked on as he displayed the newspapers declaring him acquitted.

President Trump waved around a USA Today headline proclaiming his acquittal on impeachment

President Trump waved around a USA Today headline proclaiming his acquittal on impeachment

He also waved the Washington Post front page

Speaker Pelosi spoke before President Trump at the breakfast

Speaker Pelosi led a prayer for the poor

Both the president and the speaker were seated at the head table but on opposite sides of the podium.

They did not interact.

Trump shook hands with his side of the head table when he entered the 68th Annual National Prayer Breakfast and did not walk over to the other side of the podium, where the vice president and the speaker were seated.

Pelosi spoke first, leading a prayer for the poor. The president head bowed during her prayer. He did not applaud when she was done.

Vice President Mike Pence, when he arrived ahead of the president, shook hands with the speaker and sat a few chairs down from her.

Several members of Congress and members of the president’s Cabinet attended the annual breakfast.

‘The lord works in mysterious ways. I do not think he could have picked a better day to bring us all together,’ House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy said in his prayer.

The president thanked McCarthy and the breakfast hosts in his opening remarks.

Mitt Romney cited his faith as the reason for his guilty vote on Trump

‘Had failed presidential candidate @MittRomney devoted the same energy and anger to defeating a faltering Barack Obama as he sanctimoniously does to me, he could have won the election,’ the president tweeted.

Romney cited his faith as one of the reasons for his guilty vote. He voted to acquit the president on the second charge: obstruction of Congress.

‘The allegations made in the articles of impeachment are very serious. As a senator juror, I swore an oath before god to exercise impartial justice. I am profoundly religious. My faith is at the heart of who I am. I take an oath before god as enormously consequential. I knew from the outset that being tasked with judging the president, the leader of my own party would be the most difficult decision I have ever faced,’ Romney said.

And the Republican senator from Utah acknowledged he expected to feel the president’s wrath for his decision.

‘I’m aware that there are people in my party and in my state who will strenuously disapprove of my decision, and in some quarters I will be vehemently denounced. I’m sure to hear abuse from the president and his supporters. Does anyone seriously believe that I would consent to these consequences other than from an inescapable conviction that my oath before god demanded it of me?,’ he said.

It was also the first time Trump and Pelosi met since Tuesday’s State of the Union address when Trump refused to shake her hand at its beginning and she ripped up the text of his remarks at its conclusion.

After the president finished giving his annual address Tuesday night, Pelosi stood up and ripped the pages in half, dropping them on her desk.

The extraordinary clash between the two started when with Trump snubbed Pelosi’s outstretched hand after he came into the House chamber.

Trump handed Pelosi a copy of his speech when he reached the speaker’s dais – the same place she presided over his impeachment vote two months ago – but simply turned away as the Speaker took her copy of his speech, then stood in front of a chamber which echoed with cries of ‘four more years’ from Republicans – and where Democrats sat stone-faced.

Pelosi was visibly taken aback after Trump turned away from her offer.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ripped apart her copy of President Trump's State of the Union address after he finished speaking on Tuesday night

Earlier, Trump delivered an astonishing snub to Nancy Pelosi as he started his State of the Union speech Tuesday, ignoring her as she offered him a handshake

Earlier, Trump delivered an astonishing snub to Nancy Pelosi as he started his State of the Union speech Tuesday, ignoring her as she offered him a handshake

After the Senate acquitted the president on Wednesday, Pelosi said after the vote that the president remains a ‘threat’ that the House will continue to combat through its lawsuits against the administration and with the public.

‘Sadly, because of the Republican Senate’s betrayal of the Constitution, the President remains an ongoing threat to American democracy, with his insistence that he is above the law and that he can corrupt the elections if he wants to. The House will continue to protect and defend the checks and balances in the Constitution that safeguard our Republic, both in the courts of law and in the court of public opinion,’ she said in a statement.

DONALD TRUMP REMARKS ON IMPEACHMENT ACQUITTAL

Well, thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you.

Wow.

Well, thank you very much, everybody. Wow. We’ve all been through a lot together. And we probably deserved that hand for all of us, because it’s been a very unfair situation. I invited some of our very good friends, and we have limited room, but everybody wanted to come. Kept it down to a minimum. Believe it or not, this is a minimum. But a tremendous thing was done over the last number of months. Really, if you go back to it, over the last number of years. We had the witch hunt, it started from the day we came down the elevator. Myself and our future first lady, who is with us right now.

Thank you, Melania.

And it never really stopped. We’ve been going through this now for over three years. It was evil, it was corrupt, it was dirty cops. It was a leakers and lawyers. This should never happen to another president, ever. I don’t know that other presidents would have been able to take it. Some people said no, they wouldn’t have. But I can tell you, at a minimum, you have to focus on this because it can get away very quickly, no matter who you have with you. It can get away very quickly. It was a disgrace. Had I not fired James Comey, who was a disaster, by the way, it’s possible I wouldn’t even be standing here right now. We caught him in the act. Dirty cops. Bad people. If this happened to President Obama, a lot of people would have been in jail for a long time already. Many, many years. I want to start by thanking some of — I call them friends because, you know, you develop friendships and relationships when you are in battle and in war, much more so than, “Gee, let’s have a normal situation.” With all we’ve gone through, I think we’ve done more than any president in any administration. Really, I say, for the most part, Republican congressmen and congresswomen and Republican senators — we’ve done more than any administration in the first few years. You look at all the things we’ve done. I watched this morning as they tried to take credit for the stock market.

Think of that. Let me tell you, if we didn’t win, the stock market would have crashed. The market was going up a lot before the election because it was looking like we had a good chance to win. It went up tremendously from the time we won the election to the time we took office, which was November 8th until January 20th. That’s our credit, that’s all our credit. Leading up to that point was our credit, because there was hope. One of the reasons the stock market has gone up so much in the last few days is people think we are doing so well. They liked the state of the union speech.

It really is, it’s a true honor. Making the state of the union speech, I was with some people who have been around. They’ve been all over the world. One of them is a highly sophisticated person. They said, “You know, no matter where you go in the world, it doesn’t make any difference. There is nothing like what I witnessed tonight. The beauty, the majesty of the chamber. The power of the United States. The power of the people in this room.” Really, amazing. I don’t think there’s anything like that anywhere in the world. You can go to any other country, any other location, any other place. It’s the beauty of everything. It’s what it represents, and how it represents our country. I want to start by introducing some of the people that are here. I know some are going to be left out, but they work so hard. And this is really not a news conference, it’s not a speech. It’s not anything, it’s just — we are sort of — it’s a celebration. Because we have something that just worked out. I mean, it worked out. We went through hell unfairly, did nothing wrong.

Did nothing wrong. I’ve done things wrong in my life, I will admit.

Not purposely, but I’ve done things wrong. This is what the end result is.

So… [holds up front page of The Washington Post] You can take that home. Honey, maybe we’ll frame it. The only good headline I’ve ever had on “The Washington post.”

But every paper is the same. Does anybody have those papers does anybody have them? They are like that. So I appreciate that. But some of the people here have been incredible warriors. They are warriors. There’s nothing from a legal standpoint — this is a political thing. Every time I say, “This is unfair, let’s go to court,” they say, “Sir, you can’t go to court, this is politics.” We were treated unbelievably unfairly. You have to understand, we first went through “Russia, Russia, Russia.” It was all bullshit.

We then went through the Mueller report. And they should have come back one day later. They didn’t, they came back two years later after lives were ruined. After people went bankrupt. After people lost all their money. People went to Washington to help other people. Bright eyed and bushy tail, they say they came, one or two or three people in particular. But many people, we had a rough campaign.

It was nasty. One of the nastiest, they say. They say Andrew Jackson was always the nastiest campaign. They actually said we topped it. It was nasty both in the primaries and in the election. But you see, we thought after the election it would stop. But it didn’t stop, it just started. Tremendous corruption. Tremendous corruption. So, we had a campaign — little did we know we were running against some very, very bad and evil people with fake dossiers, with all of these horrible, dirty cops that took these dossiers and did bad things. They knew all about it. The FISA courts, should be ashamed of themselves. It’s a very tough thing. And we ended up winning on the “Russia, Russia, Russia.” It should have taken the one day, it took years. Then Bob Mueller testified. That didn’t work out so well for the oversight.

But they should have said that first week, because it came out. Is that right, Jim Jordan? They knew the first two days, actually. Is that right? They knew we were totally innocent. But they kept it going, mark. The kept it going forever. Because they wanted to inflict political pain on somebody that — I had just won an election, a lot of people were surprised. We had polls that said we were going to win. We have the “Los Angeles times” were going to win. But it was going to be close. We did win. It was one of the greatest wins of all time. And they said, “Okay, he won.” I wrote this down because that was where a thing called an insurance policy — to me, when I saw the insurance policy, and that was done long before the election.

It was done when we thought Hillary Clinton was going to win. By the way, Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for millions. Millions of dollars, the fake dossier. Now Christopher Steele admits that it’s a fake. Because he got sued by rich people. I should have sued him, too. But when you are president, people don’t like suing. I want to thank my legal team, by the way.

Not for that advice, but for other.

Pat, Jay, you guys, stand up.

Great job. Right at the beginning, they said, “Sir, you have nothing to worry about. All of the facts on your side.” I said, “You don’t understand, that doesn’t matter. That doesn’t matter.” And that was really true. They made up facts. A corrupt politician named Adam Schiff made up my statement to the Ukrainian president. He brought it out of thin air, just made it up. They say he’s a screenwriter, a failed screenwriter. Unfortunately he went into politics after that.

Remember, he said the statement? “Don’t call me, I’ll call you.” I didn’t say that. Fortunately for all of us here today and for our country, we had transcripts. We had transcribers, professional transcribers. Then they said, “Oh, well, maybe the transcription is not correct.” But Lieutenant Colonel Vindman and his twin brother, right? We had some people, really amazing. But we did everything. We said, “What’s wrong with that,” they didn’t at this word or that word. It didn’t matter. “At it.

They’re probably wrong, but added ” now everybody agrees they were perfectly accurate. Tim Scott — I don’t know if Tim is here, but he said, “Are –” he was the first want to call me. “Sir, I read the transcript. You did nothing wrong.” And, Mitch, he stayed there right from the beginning. He never changed. Mitch Mcconnell, I want to tell you. You did a fantastic job.

Somebody said, “You know, Mitch is quiet.” I said, “He’s not quiet. He’s not quite.”

He doesn’t want people to know him. And they said, “Is Mitch smart?” And I said, “Well, let’s put it this way. For many, many years, a lot of very smart — bad, in many cases, sometimes good — people have been trying to take his place. To the best of my knowledge, I’ve never even heard the subject come up, because they’ve been wiped out so fast.”

This guy is great and I appreciate Mitch. He has also given us 191, now. 191 federal judges. Two supreme court judges. Up to 191. Great guy. Great guy. He’s a tough guy to read. I’m good at reading people. A tough guy to read. I told him – my wife would say, “How do you do with Mitch?” And I’d say, “Uh, I don’t know.”

That’s what makes them good, when you can read somebody. Fantastic job. He understood right from the beginning this was crooked politics. This was crooked politics. How about all these people? They are running for office. They are saying the worst things about me, like eight senators on the democratic side. Most of them got wiped out. They got 1% or less. Most of them got less. They decided to go home. “Let’s go back to California. Let’s go back to –” wherever they came from. “Go back to New York.” How about that? Our New York Senator, Gillibrand. “Let’s go back to New York.” After they get nothing. Then they take an oath that they will be fair, that they will be reasonable come all the different things. They are not fair. But here’s the beauty, we have four left. They are saying the most horrendous things about me. It’s okay, it’s politics. And then they are supposed to vote! On me! They are trying to replace me, and then they are supposed to be voting. So I think — I mean, I think it’s incredible. So, Mitch, I want to thank you very much. Incredible. We have some of your folks here, they are incredible people. They’ve been great from the beginning. Again, you are out of session, unfortunately. I only told these folks, “Let’s do this today.” We did a prayer breakfast this morning. I thought that was really good. In fact, it was so good, it wiped us out. By the time we finished, this will wipe that one outcome of those statements.

I had Nancy Pelosi sitting four seats away and I’m saying things that a lot of people wouldn’t have said, but I meant everything.

I meant every word of it. We have some of the folks that are going to be leaving right after this. They work hard, and they did work hard. Though Bill Cassidy, senator, stand up, Bill. What a guy.

Great man. When I need to know about health insurance and pre-existing conditions and individual mandates, I called Bill.

Or I call Barrasso. Those two guys, they know more than anybody. A man who just became a senator. He’s a little bit like me. We have a couple of them. Very successful guy in business, and he said, “What the hell? I’ll run for the senate,” from Indiana. And he ran. I saw him on television, destroying his opponent in a debate. I said, “This guy could win.” I got behind him, and Mike Braun, you have done some great job. Thank you very much.

Tough! A man who got James Comey to choke. And he was just talking in his regular voice. He’s the roughest man — she’s actually an unbelievable — and I appreciate the letter you sent me today. I just got it. He’s got this voice that scares people.

You know, people from Iowa can be very tough. We are doing very well in Iowa, but I tell you, Chuck Grassley. “You tell me, what did you say,” he wasn’t being rough, that’s just the way he talked.

That’s when — I think that’s when Comey announced he was leaking, lying and everything else. He choked! Because he never heard anybody talk like that. I wish you got angry, you could have gotten the whole ball game. He would have said, “I give up!” Chuck Grassley is an incredible guy.

And a man who — you know, he was running against a tough, smart campaigner. We learned how good she was, right? She was a great campaigner. In fact, by the end of the campaign, I thought she was more for me than you were, Josh.

I was worried. She was saying the greatest things about me. You know I’m talking about I went to a great place, Missouri. And I said, “Who do you have to beat her?” And they said, “Well, we have four people.” I said, “Let me see them.” Can you imagine can make I’m interviewing people for the United States senate, this is what I do. Where have I gone? But I love it. We get great people. The first when I met with Josh Hawley. After about 10 minutes and said to the people, “Don’t show me anybody else, this is the guy.” He was the attorney general, ditto phenomenal job in the state. Highly respected. And Claire Mccaskill. The theory was you couldn’t beat her. Great campaign-the art. Remember last campaign, she was always going be taken up. People say, “How did that happen chemicals go it didn’t happen with him. I’m putting this in the archives is 1 of the best ads I’ve ever made. She tried to convince people we are best friends, but Josh ended up winning by five or six points. You are unbelievable, you were tough, and you are something. One of the greatest supporters of the impeachment hoax with Josh Hawley. He was incensed, actually. He was incensed at what they were doing and what they were doing. I had some who said, “I wish you didn’t make a call,” and that’s okay. If they need that. It’s incorrect. It’s totally incorrect. And you have some who used religion as a crutch. They never used it before… An article written today, “Never heard him use it before.” But today, it’s one of those things. It’s a failed presidential candidate, so things can happen when you fail so badly running for president.

But Josh Hawley, I want to thank you. You were right from the beginning. Man, did I make a good choice. Thank you, Josh. Tremendous future. A man who is brilliant, and who actually was deceived, to an extent. Comes from a great state, Utah, where my poll numbers have gone through the roof. And one of the senators’ poll numbers — not this one — went down big.

You saw that, Mike? Mike Lee is a brilliant guy. He’s difficult.

Whenever — we do sign a lot of legislation, it’s big and it’s powerful, but it sort of — everybody has to approve it. I see 99 to one. 99 to one. I say, “Don’t tell me who’s the one.”

“Is it Mike?” “Yes.”

And he always has a good reason for it, too come by the way but he is, he’s incredible. Right at the beginning, he knew we were right, Mike. I appreciate it very much. Fantastic. Say hello to the people of Utah, and tell them I’m sorry about Mitt Romney. I’m sorry. Okay?

We can say that Mike Lee is by far the most popular senator from the state. But you’ve done a fantastic job, Mike. In many ways. In many ways. A young woman who I didn’t know at all, but she has been so supportive. And I’ve had great support from other people in that state. She has been so supportive, and she has been downright nasty and mean about the unfairness to the president. Kelly Loeffler, I appreciate it very much. Thank you.

She started very early on. We have — I don’t know if we have other senators here, but we’ve got a hell of a lot of congressmen. I will go over them quickly. They’ve also been — it helped when we won, 197 to nothing. That’s got to be a first, Kevin, right? Is that, like, a first? Republicans have this image. I say Democrats are lousy politicians because they have lousy policy. Open borders, sanctuary cities. They have horrible policy. Who the hell can — oh, the new policy is raise taxes. They want to raise taxes. All my life, I wasn’t in politics, but I would say if you are a politician you say you want to lower taxes. They want to raise taxes. They have open borders, sanctuary cities, Reeser and Brady’s taxes, get rid of everybody’s health care, 180 million people in the United States — and they are really happy. And we are going to give you health care the cost more money if the country could make in 30 years if it does really well. That’s one year. I always said, they are. They do two things. They are vicious and mean. Vicious. These people are vicious. Adam Schiff is a vicious, horrible person. Nancy Pelosi is a horrible person. And she wanted to impeach a long time ago. When she said, “I pray for the president, I prefer the president.” She doesn’t pray. She may pray, but pray for the opposite.

They don’t pray at all. They do vicious — they stick to give it prehistorically. I’m not talking about now. They stick together like glue. That’s how they impeached, because they had whatever the numbers — 220 people. So they don’t lose anybody. They will be able to impeach anybody. You could be George Washington, you could have just won the war, and they would say, “Let’s get him out of office.

“They stuck together and they are vicious as hell. And they will probably come back for more, but they may not, because the Republican party’s poll numbers, Mitch, have now gone up more than any time, I think, since 2004 or 2005. You know what happened then. But in normal times, decades, you would call it — that was an unusual time. It was for a very short period. The Republican party’s poll numbers — and Donald Trump’s poll numbers of the highest I’ve ever had.

It’s no way to get your poll numbers up. Because from my family’s standpoint, it’s been very unfair for my family. It’s been very unfair to the country. Think of it. A phone call. A very good phone call. I know bad phone calls. This is a phone call where Merritt don’t like many people

— I think Mike Pompeo was probably on the call. Many people were on the call. They even have “Apprenti come” bring up a favorite word of my current apprentice. They have apprenti on this call. There many people. In the case of Ukraine, he’s a new president, seems like a very nice person, by the way. His whole thing was corruption. He’s going to stop corruption. We have a treaty, a signed treaty that we will work together to root out corruption in Ukraine. I probably have a legal obligation, Mr. Attorney, to report corruption. They don’t even think a corrupt way son who made no money, that got thrown out of the military, that had no money at all, is working for $3 million upfront, $83,000 a month. And that’s only Ukraine.

Then goes to China, picks up $1.5 billion. Then goes to Romania, I hear, and many other countries. They think that’s okay. Because, if it is, Ivanka in the audience? Boy, my kids could make a fortune.

It’s corrupt. But it’s not even that, it’s just general corruption. The other thing is mentioned in the call. Something I’ve told Mike Pence, our great vice president. I would tell him all the time, and I told him when he went on the trip. Because he was over there. He never mentioned anything about this, when you hide your meeting. It’s a terrible thing. I told Mike, I said, “Mike, we are giving them money, and you are always torn about that because we have our country to build. We have our cities to build and our roads to fix. But we are giving the money. Tell me, why isn’t Germany paying money? Why isn’t Frantz? Why isn’t the United Kingdom paying money? What aren’t they paying money? Why are we paying money? Is that the correct statement to find out what the hell is going on.” I told that all my people come on B. Asked that question. Why isn’t Germany paying? Why is the United States always the sucker?” Because we are a bunch of suckers. But that’s turning around fast. But it makes it harder when stuff like this happens. Because you want to focus, and you want to focus perfectly. Think we could have done, if the same energy was put into infrastructure, prescription drug prices. Think of what we could have done. And I’m now talking both sides. Think of what we could have done if we had the same genus. Because it’s genius. I will say, it’s genius on the other side. Maybe even more so, because they took nothing and brought me to a final vote of impeachment.

That’s a very ugly word to me. It’s a very dark word, very ugly. They took nothing. They took that phone call that was a totally appropriate call — I call it a perfect call, because it was — and they brought me to the final stages of impeachment. But now we have that gorgeous word. I never thought a word would sound so good. It’s called, “Total acquittal.” Total acquittal.

So, I want to come if I could real fast , just introduce a few of the people. I have to start with Kevin. Man, did you do a job. Lucky you are there. It wouldn’t have worked out. If you don’t have the right people, I tell you, Kevin McCarthy has done an incredible job. He loves his job, he loves his country. I’ll tell you what, Mitch and Kevin, they love what they do. Mitch wouldn’t even tell you he liked it.

Mitch, do you like it? “I don’t know.”

He’s the greatest poker player, right? And Kevin would say, “I love it.” Right? And I will say, you are going to be Speake of the house because of this impeachment hoax. And I’m going to work hard on it.

I’m going to try to get out to those trump areas that we won by a lot. You know, in ’18, we didn’t win back. We just won two seats in North Carolina. Two wonderful seats in North Carolina that were not supposed to be won. But I went and I made speeches, and we had rallies, and we did a great job and we won. We took two seats, nobody writes about that.

If we had lost them they would have been the biggest stories of the year. We are going to go, we are going to do a job, and we are going to enact a lot of seats. People are very angry that Nancy Pelosi and all of these guys — Nadler, I’ve known and much of my life. He has fought me in New York for 25 years. I always beat him. I had to beat him another time, and I will probably have to beat him again. If they find I happened to walk across the street and maybe go against the light or something, “Let’s impeach him!”

So I’ll probably have to do it again, because these people have gone stone cold crazy. But I’ve beaten him all my life and I will beat him again if I have to.

But what they are doing is very unfair. Very unfair. So, Kevin McCarthy has been great. So, a few names, right? If you want, you can raise and I will say, “Great, love to have you, wonderful.” But we will do the best we can. I have Mike evident but my cabin is different, I appoint them. I didn’t see all of them helping so much. They were running there, various bureaucracies. My cabinet is great and they are all here, but today is the day to celebrate these great warriors. They are great warriors, they really fought hard with us. Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota. Kelly, thank you, great job.

Jim Banks of Indiana. Jim, thank you, great job.

Andy Biggs. Where is Andy? Boy, oh, boy, Andy.

There’s a guy. He’s tough. I hear we are doing well in Arizona, huh? Going good, yeah? I saw a poll that was very good. For me. I think Martha is going to do — we have some states that are going to be not easy, but Arizona has been great and we are stopping illegal aliens from coming in.

We are putting up walls. New Mexico, too, the state that’s never been in play for Republicans, is totally in play. Nevada is really looking good. We are doing well. We are going to have a great — there is more spirit. I will say this, there is more spirit now for the Republican Party, by far, than the Democrats. Mike pence just got back from a place, a beautiful place that Chuck Grassley knows well. Iowa. And he was talking about this fiasco, the Democrats — they can’t count some simple votes, and yet they want to take over your health care system. Think of that. We also had an election out there, we got 98% of the vote. Have two people running, you know. I guess to consider them nonpeople, but they are running. One of them was the governor. One was a congressman. They are running. We’ve got 98% of the vote, and everybody from the media was saying, “Who are those crowds over there?” They expected to be competitive for everybody’s running because they want to enact. And it was Trump. Right, Mark Meadows? It was Trump. This was the trump crowd. Actually, a lot of my guys went there. They went to Iowa, and a lot of friends went there. They say the spirit for the Republican party right now is stronger, I think, than it’s ever been in the history of our country.

I think it’s stronger than it’s ever been. And that includes honest Abe Lincoln. A lot of people forget, Abe Lincoln — I wish you were here, I give him one hell of an introduction.

But he was a Republican. Abe Lincoln, honest Abe. Bradley Byrne, Alabama. What a great place.

Thank you, Bradley. A man who has been an unbelievable friend of mine and spokesman, and somebody who I really like.

And I know, Kelly, you are going to end up liking him a lot. Something’s going to happen that’s very good, I don’t know. I haven’t figured out yet. But Doug Collins. Where is he?

You have been so great. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Really, an amazing job. A young man who is born with a great gene, because I know his father and how great a politician he was. He’s from Florida. Sometimes controversial, but actually he’s not controversial. He’s solid as a rock and a friend of mine, Matt Gaetz. Thank you, Matt.

Great job. All right. This guy. So, he is the NCAA wrestling champion when he was in college a couple years ago. That’s a big deal. That means in all of college, you are a champ. You the best. His record was ridiculous, nobody could beat him. I see it, every time I see it. When I first get to know him, Jim Jordan, when I first got to know Jim I said, “Huh, never wears a jacket. What the hell is going on?”

He’s obviously very proud of his body.

And they say where he works out with the congressmen, senators, they say when Jim works out, even though he’s not as young as he was, when he works out, the machine starts burning. It’s a different form of a workout event us, right, sonny? There he is, look at that guy. One day and looking, he looks tough. I’m looking at those years. And I say, “Those years have something going on there.” I said, “Did you ever wrestle?” “I did.” He doesn’t talk, but I checked. This guy was a champion top wrestler.

When I had the top — I had all of the teams. By the way, your super bowl champions are coming. I think next week, or soon. Very soon. Every one of them want to be here. The coach loves us. The coach is great. Andy Reid.

Every one of them want to be here. People love it. But we had all of the NCAA championship teams here. They had the golf, the basketball, they had every team here. And one of the teams was wrestling. The wrestling team. Was that Penn state? And Penn state won the title, they have a great team. I walked up with Jim, and it’s like I didn’t exist.

Those wrestlers, they grabbed him, they love Jim Jordan, and we love you, too. Because you are some warrior.

A woman who became — we have a couple of women that became stars. You two. I always like the name, Lesko.” I so that face, I had the cards, seven opponents. You have no idea how much the public appreciates how smart, how sharp you are. This, I can’t tell. They just said, “You know, she’s really good, she’s really talented.” I said, “Let’s go.” We worked with her, she won her race. Tough race. It’s no longer tough. What she does out there is incredible. Arizona loves her. But you are so incredible, representing — I don’t see me, representing our country and getting us out of this impeachment hoax. We did was incredible. So, Debbie, please stand up. Debbie Lesko.

A man who I became very friendly with. I don’t know why. You ever have it where — I’ll ask the media. Certain people call, you take the calls. Other people call, if they don’t have information, they won’t take anybody’s call. Both are people call, and this is a guy who — he’s just a very special guy. His wife, I actually like better than him, to be honest.

Because he doesn’t know that I know that he didn’t actually support me right from the beginning, but she did.

And on my worst day — right? On my worst day, my worst, I won’t tell you why it’s my worst day, she got a bus, got many of the buses, and women all over well, Mark was sort of semi-supporting another candidate. Which he ended up leaving very quickly. I don’t think he had a choice, because of your wife. So thank her. Mark Meadows is an extra ordinary guy. The only problem is I guess he’s announcing that she would only win by 40 points, but he is announcing that he is not running this time. You have somebody good to run? Is somebody going to win your district by at least 20 points, please? Okay. But he’s a tremendously talented man. Not just as a politician, as a human being is incredible. And during these horrible times

— the way he worked, and Jim, and all of you guys, the way they worked was so — it was like their life was at stake. So many. Ron DeSantis is another one. He worked so hard. He called me, he said, “Sir, I would like to run for governor.” I said, “Governor? I don’t want you to run. I like you –” “No, I want to run for governor.” I said, “Well, if I have to. How can I support you, you are at three.” He had no money. Somebody else had $22 million in cash. I said, “If it’s important, I’ll do it.” These and great warrior. By the way, he ran, I endorsed him, his numbers went through the roof. The men who he beat, who was expected to win back easily, called me after the race. He said, “You endorsed him and it was like a nuclear bomb went off. There was nothing I could do.” He never even spent his money, he saved it. But Ron DeSantis is another one. And now he’s the governor of Florida. By the way, he’s a great governor. He is a very popular governor. His numbers are in the 70s, and he’s done a great job. But, mark, I want to thank you very much.

Fantastic job, thank you very much. Mark Meadows.

And Mike Johnson of Louisiana. Where’s Mike? Central casting, what a job. You can represent me any time. You can represent me anytime. Thank you. What a job you’ve done. Thank you, Mike. And a man nobody’s ever heard of except the other side. He’s the other side’s worst nightmare. This guy goes down into dungeons and basements, he will find a document no matter what. He’s the most legitimate human being, he’s the hardest worker. He’s unbelievable. He took tremendous abuse. The media, and the other side, the bad ones, the leakers, the liars, the dirty cops they, they want to destroy him. They tried, but he wouldn’t let it happen. In a certain way, he was the first one. Wouldn’t you say? This was the first guide. Came out of nowhere. He’s saying, “These people are corrupt.” He is still saying it. He was unbelievable. Devin Nunes. Unbelievable.

That’s so true, Devin. He would come in and say — I didn’t even know them. I just heard there was this congressman who just kept going into a basement come into files. He knew something was wrong. You felt it, right? Now we know a lot more than we knew then, right? You never thought it was as bad as it is, and hopefully we are going to take care of things, because we can never, ever allow this to happen again.

Scott Perry of Pennsylvania. Scott, thank you. Thank you, Scott. Really great. I’m doing very well over there, by the way. Just so you — a man who is — central casting, if I’m going to pick Perry mason, I’m going to do a remake of “Perry mason.” Other than Bill Barr, I would pick the sky. But I would pick Barr first. John Ratcliffe. If we were doing a remake of “Perry mason,” the man I get — there is nobody in Hollywood like this. John Ratcliff.

Such a great lawyer. Incredible guy, incredible talent. Just a great lawyer. We appreciate it. He gets on that screen and everybody says, “I agree.” The other side folds up so fast, we’ll probably be using a lot of you in the next year. We’ve been fantastic, John. We appreciate it. Thank you very much. I meant it was braver than me and braver than all of us in this room. He got whacked. He got whacked, my Steve. Right? I went to the hospital with our great first lady that night. Right, honey? We saw a man who was not going to make it. He was not going to make it. The doctor — I told him, his wife, I said, “She loves you.” “Why did you say that?” Because she was devastated. A lot of wives wouldn’t give a damn.

I would say, “How is he doing?” ?” She couldn’t even talk, she was inconsolable. “Not good.” “I’m going home now.”

She was a total mess. She was really devastated. It really looked like he had a 20, 25% chance — I think you set a record for blood loss. And Steve Scalise, actually — honestly, I think you’re a better looking, more handsome now. You weren’t that good looking, you look good now

He looks better now, can you believe it? I don’t know what the hell that is.

Better now.

What a guy. And he was practicing for the baseball game against the Democrats, right? And this whack job started shooting. Hurt Roger. I don’t know if Roger is here. Heard a heard a number of people. Steve was the second baseman. He went down, and it was terrible. I mean, I saw the whole thing, and it was terrible. Fortunately, you had to cope brave policeman with you because of your high position in congress. You had to policeman and they were amazing. A man and woman. They came in, they didn’t have rifles. They were supposedly against a pretty good sharpshooter with rifles, good equipment. All they had was a gun. They started coming in from the outfield, shooting. They are so far away, that a handgun is not preferred. This guy has a rifle, he’s hitting people, and he was going to move up, and there was no out. If he had been able to move up, there was no way to get out. The entrance was a single entrance way on the other side where he was. So everyone went into the dugout, ran into the dugout. But Steve was really hit badly in the stomach. With a bullet that rips you apart. It was supposed to do that, it rips you apart. These two people came, charging forward. Boom, boom, boom. And one of them — you know who? One of them, him, got the shooter. Hit him. And then got him.

Killed him. From long distance. It was amazing. If you didn’t have those two people, you could imagine. Right? You could imagine what would happen. Melania and I went to the hospital that night, and he was in such bad shape. He’s been working ever since, so hard. Six months ago, they had a baseball game at the national — I’m watching. It’s on television. It’s just. It’s a game, you want to win it. Right? Steve is second base. The poor guy can’t even walk. Do you remember Bobby Richardson for the New York Yankees? He was known for range, Louis. He had the greatest range. If the ball at the shortstop, Bobby Richardson is the second baseman. Bobby Richardson would feel the ball. If it went to first base, he was sure which first base and paint had unbelievable range. This was not Steve Scalise.

Steve had no range.

1 foot, and he has to fall down. Right? He was trying to get better. I don’t know who the hell put you on the field.

And this is a true story. The game starts, and the first pitch, Steve is standing there at second base and the guy is really in bad shape. And I said, “This is terrible.” A ground ball, shot, is hit to second. And Steve, I didn’t have time to think through much, but I said, “This is not good. That ball is going toward him.” And this guy stopped that ball, caught the ball. He’s now laying down. He throws the ball to first base, he gets them out. I said — it’s the most incredible thing. I’ve never seen it. I’ve never seen anything like it.

Right? And he gets him out, and they then took him out of the game. Which was a very wise thing.

Because you could ever do that again in a million years.

But you aren’t going to let that all go through — I don’t care if it was hit by the greatest of all time. Right? That ball is not going through you, because you are a warrior. Steve is fantastic. You are fantastic. You and Liz, Kevin, what a group. I mean, what a group. I got lucky. Because you need the right people. I fired the wrong people, it may be a different story. Maybe we’d be celebrating something else. But I really want to thank you. Steve Scalise. And Elise, you — I just read this story. Most incredible, what’s going on with you, Elise. I even said — I was up campaigning, helping. I thought, “She looks good, she looks like good talent.” But I didn’t realize, when she opens that mouth, you were killing them, Elise! You were killing them!

Elise, and there’s a big story in “The New York Post.” I love “The New York Post.” They treat me well. There aren’t many of you do, but today they are treating you well. I even had a great headline. “New York Times,” “Washington post.” I had all these great headlines. Maybe we should just send it right there. We had a great story yesterday in the post that people from all over the country are contributing to her campaign. They were so enthralled with the way you handled yourself. What you said, the way you said it. I’ll always be your friend. It’s really an amazing story. What a great future you have. What a great future, thank you.

The first lady agrees, by the way. The first lady agrees. And Michael turner, you can represent me any time. Where is Michael? Where is he? You can represent me. How good were you?

There’s another “Perry mason” type, I think.

What do you think, John? Michael, you are fantastic, and we appreciate it. Brad Wenstrup. Where is Brad?

Brad. Great, great job. It’s a big day. All the lawyers stayed behind. Lee Zeldin, how good are you?

How good are you? Man. And Louis, your name — they didn’t give me your name. If I didn’t announce Louie — whoever the hill made this list, I’ve got to get rid of them. If I wouldn’t have announced Louie, it might have been the end of the presidency. Louie, you have been so great. So tough and so smart. I got it. But Louie has been amazing. He’s a tough guy, a smart guy. He’s streetwise like crazy. We love Texas. We are with you all the way, Louie. We are with you all the way. Thank you very much.

So that’s the story. We have a great group of warriors, and there are others left. I guess, probably — I’m sure I didn’t mention a few. I apologize if that’s the case. How is CPAC doing, good? Stand up, will you? He’s the one who said, “You should run.”

Right? Matt said — it’s like five years ago, six years ago. I made a speech, and then they do some kind of a straw poll. Who made the best speech? And he said I made the best speech, out of all these professionals — I hate to say this, with all these professional politicians, they voted that by far the best speech was trump. He calls me and said, “We should run for politics.” I said, what do I know about politics,” we learned quickly at our country has ever done better than it’s doing right now.

But thank you, Matt.

So that’s the story. Even treated very unfairly. Fortunately we have great men and women that came to our defense. If we didn’t, this would have been a horrific incident for our country. When you have Lisa and Peter, the lovers, the FBI lovers.

I want to believe the path you threw out for deputy director Andrew McCabe. That’s the office. There’s no way he gets elected, meaning me. “There’s no way he gets elected.” This is Peter to Lisa. He’s probably trying to impress her, for obvious reasons.

“There’s no way he gets elected. But I’m afraid we can’t take the risk.” Think of this. In other words, if I get elected, they can’t — they, two lowlifes, they can’t take the risk. Think of it. That’s where it came up. The greatest word of all, “Insurance policy.” But he says, “I’m afraid we can’t take the risk. She may lose.” “It’s like an insurance policy, in the unlikely event you die before your 40. In other words, if I won, they were going to do exactly what they did to us. They were going to try and overthrow the government of the United States. A duly elected president. If I didn’t fire James Comey, we would have never found this stuff. Because when I fired that sleazebag, all hell broke out. They were ratting on each other, they were running for the hills. Let’s see what happens. Let’s see what happens. It’s in the hands of some very talented people. We are going to have to see what happens.

But I can tell you, in my opinion, these are the crooked-est, most dishonest, dirtiest people, I’ve seen. They said — this is Strzok — “God, who were he should win, 100 million to one.” This is about me. This is an agent from the FBI. Look how they let her off. 33,000 emails, deleted. Nothing happens to her. Nothing happens. It’s unbelievable. But think of that read “God, Hillary should win.” These guys are investigating Hillary. They go to work for Mueller, the two of them. And when Mueller found out that everybody knew that they were 100% this way, he let them go. But they deleted all of their emails and text messages. So when we got the phone, they were all deleted. Could you imagine the treasure trove? Of the illegally deleted so they left, Bob Mueller, he had to look but he didn’t have a lot of other things. Always had to look. Mr. G-man. I love the FBI and the FBI loves me, 100%. It was the top scum, and the FBI people don’t like the top scum. So think of that, 100 million, he’s investigating me. And then, “God, trump is a loathsome human being, isn’t he?” These are the people looking at me. I’m really not a bad person. And Page said , “Yes, he’s awful.” How would you like to have that? This is the good stuff. This stuff, there’s stuff 100 times worse than that. These are all dirty people. And now I just heard that they are suing the United States of America. Because they were interfered with.

Just not going to let it happen “We cannot let this happen to our country.

So, I’m going to leave now. I don’t know if any of you have anything to say. You could say it, but this is sort of a day of celebration, because we went through hell. I’m sure that Pelosi and Crying Chuck — the only time I ever saw him cry was when it was appropriate. I’ve known them for a long time. Crying Chuck. I’m sure they will try and cook up other things that go through the state of New York. Other places. They will do whatever they can. Instead of wanting to heal our country and fix our country, all they want to do, in my opinion, it’s almost like they want to destroy our country. We can’t let it happen. Jim Jordan, did you want to say something cannot go ahead. Mark Meadows? Huh? My?

[Mark Meadows comment: I just want to say that this reflection today is a small reflection of the kind of support you have all across the country.]

This was a highly partisan situation. Pelosi said — I copied it down exactly. Before the impeachment. She wanted to impeach from day one, by the way. Don’t let it fool you. “No, impeachment is a very serious thing.” I said, “She wants to impeach, watch.” “The impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there is something so compelling and so overwhelming and bipartisan.” Bipartisan? It was 170 to nothing. The one failed presidential candidate, and I call that half of the vote because he actually voted for us on the other one.

But we had one failed presidential candidate. That’s the only half of what we lost. So, we had almost 53 to nothing. We had 197 to nothing. And the only one that voted against was a guy that can’t stand the fact that he ran one of the worst campaigns in the history of the presidency. But she said, “It has to be something so compelling and so overwhelming and bipartisan.” “I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country.” She was right about that. “And it’s just not worth it.” That was Nancy Pelosi a year ago. I think it’s a shame. I think it’s a shame. As I said, if we can put this genius to work on roads and highways and bridges and all of the things we can do, prescription drugs. You know, we had — secretary Azar is here, and I want to thank you for this — we had the first time in 51 years where drug prices actually came down last year. First time in 51 years. We can do working with both parties in congress would be unbelievable. It would be unbelievable. All we can do. I know Chuck Grassley is working very hard on it, and Mitch is working very hard on it. We can do is incredible. What we can do just generally. We’ve done so much without it. We rebuilt our military, we’ve cut regulations at a level that nobody thought possible. We will always protect our second amendment, we all know that. I just want to tell you that it’s an honor to be with you all.

I want to apologize to my family for having them have to go through a phony, rotten deal by some very evil and sick people. And Ivanka is here, my sons, my whole family. And that includes Barron. He’s up there, he’s a young boy. Stand up, honey. Ivanka, thank you, honey.

I just want to thank my family for sticking through it. This was not part of the deal. I was going to run for president, and if I won, I was going to do a great job. I didn’t know I was going to run and then when I got in I was going to have to run again and again and again. Every week, I had to run again. That wasn’t the deal, but they stuck with me. I’m so glad I did it, because we are making progress and doing things for our great people that everybody said couldn’t be done. Our country is thriving, our country is just respected again. And it’s an honor to be with the people in this room. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7974859/Trump-goes-leakers-liars-acquitted.html

Story 3: DNC Chair Demands Iowa Recheck The Vote Count and Bernie Sanders Won By More Than 8,000 — Videos

DNC chair calls for Iowa to recanvass caucus vote, says ‘enough is enough’

The results of Monday’s Iowa caucuses were delayed after there were problems with a smartphone app.
Image: Tom Perez

Tom Perez, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, speaks on stage ahead of the fourth Democratic primary debate at Otterbein University in Westerville, Ohio, on Oct. 15, 2019. Saul Loeb / AFP via Getty Images file.Saul Loeb / AFP via Getty Images file

By Phil Helsel

Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez is calling on Iowa Democratic officials to immediately recanvass Monday’s caucus vote after days of uncertainty and growing concerns about “inconsistencies” found in the data.

“Enough is enough,” Perez said in a tweet. “In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.”

A recanvass is essentially a double-checking of the vote. Iowa officials would have to hand -audit the caucus worksheets and reporting forms to ensure that they were correctly calculated and reported.

In a statement released later Thursday, Iowa Democratic Party Chair Troy Price did not address the request from Perez and instead said that the party would take on a recanvass if any of the presidential campaigns request it.

“We owe it to the thousands of Iowa Democratic volunteers and caucusgoers to remain focused on collecting and reviewing incoming results,” Price said, noting that officials “identified inconsistencies in the data and used our redundant paper records to promptly correct those errors. This is an ongoing process in close coordination with precinct chairs, and we are working diligently to report the final 54 precincts to get as close to final reporting as possible.”

As of Thursday morning, former South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg was clinging to the narrowest of leads in Iowa over Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., with 97 percent of the caucus vote released.

Buttigieg was at 26.2 percent and Sanders had 26 percent, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., running behind the pair of leaders at 18.2 percent. Former Vice President Joe Biden had 15.8 percent, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., at 12.2 percent and other candidates were in low single digits.

Sanders told reporters Thursday that he is not concerned about the DNC’s call for a recanvassing.

“We won an 8-person election by some 6,000 votes,” Sanders said. “That is not going to change.”

Klobuchar told NBC News on Thursday that she supported the process.

“You have to make sure that every single vote was counted,” she said. “Sometimes in caucuses things can be close.”

Iowa Democratic caucus results are not actual votes cast. The percentages, based on partial returns of the estimated number of state convention delegates won by each candidate through the caucus process, are known as state delegate equivalents, or SDEs.

The totals were put out by the Iowa Democratic Party over the past two days after chaos over the caucuses Monday night. More data may be released Thursday.

NBC News has not called a winner in the first-in-the-nation contest.

In addition to the estimates of convention delegates, the Iowa Democratic Party also released two other numbers:

In voters’ initial candidate preference at the caucuses, Sanders had 24.7 percent, or 42,672 votes, and Buttigieg took 21.3 percent, or 36,718 votes.

In voters’ reallocated preference, Sanders had 26.5 percent, or 44,753 votes, and Buttigieg had 25 percent, or 42,235 votes. The reallocated preference is the raw tally taken after the caucus process known as realignment. If a caucusgoer’s initial candidate preference did not receive enough support to meet the precinct location’s viability threshold (15 percent in most caucus locations), the caucusgoer is allowed to shift his or her support — or realign — to another candidate who did attain viability.

Results from the contest were delayed by what organizers said was a problem with a smartphone app. Final tallies had been expected that evening, but instead, partial results were released Tuesday and the remainder Wednesday.

Nevada’s Democratic Party, which had planned to use the app for its Feb. 22 caucus, said a day after the fiasco in Iowa that it would not use the app after all. The state’s Democratic Party said Tuesday that it had previously developed backup plans for its reporting systems and was in the process of “evaluating the best path forward.”

Cybersecurity experts who examined a public version of the smartphone app told NBC News it contained technical and design flaws and appeared to have been rushed into use.

Caucusgoers gathered Monday at nearly 1,700 sites across Iowa to tally support for their preferred candidates. As the delay stretched on into Tuesday, candidates came out to give speeches that sounded a lot like declarations of victory despite no numbers to support or refute them.

The state has 41 pledged delegates up for grabs, and the high-stakes contest traditionally plays a major role in determining who is a legitimate contender in the race.

Even with only a little more than 90 percent reporting in Iowa, Buttigieg on Wednesday night continued to tout the caucus as a win, telling a New York fundraiser that “we remain in the lead.”

“There is just no question that Monday in Iowa represents an astonishing victory for our vision, for our candidacy and for this country,” the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor said according to a pool report.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/buttigieg-sanders-neck-neck-iowa-nearly-all-votes-reported-n1131261

Story 4: Americans Satifaction With Life Highest in Forty Years and With Economy Highest in 20 Years — Gallup Poll — Videos

New High of 90% of Americans Satisfied With Personal Life

New High of 90% of Americans Satisfied With Personal Life

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

  • Americans’ satisfaction with personal life highest in four-decade trend
  • Two in three Americans say they are very satisfied, also a new high
  • High-income households, Republicans, married adults the most satisfied

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Nine in 10 Americans are satisfied with the way things are going in their personal life, a new high in Gallup’s four-decade trend. The latest figure bests the previous high of 88% recorded in 2003.

Line graph. Americans’ satisfaction with their personal lives, 1979-2020.

These results are from Gallup’s Mood of the Nation poll, conducted Jan. 2-15, which also recorded a 20-year high in Americans’ confidence in the U.S. economy. The percentage of Americans who report being satisfied with their personal life is similar to the 86% who said in December that they were very or fairly happy — though the happiness figure, while high, is on the low end of what Gallup has measured historically for that question.

Despite some variation, solid majorities of Americans have reported being satisfied with their personal life over the past few decades, with an average of 83% satisfied since 1979. The historical low of 73% was recorded in July 1979, as the effects of that year’s oil crisis took a toll on U.S. motorists. During that poll’s fielding dates, then-President Jimmy Carter delivered his “malaise speech,” which was interpreted by some as placing blame on Americans themselves for the rough economic spot the country was in.

2019 survey on 10 aspects of Americans’ lives found that they are most satisfied with their family life, their education and the way they spend their leisure time — and least satisfied with the amount of leisure time they have, their household income and their job.

Two in Three ‘Very’ Satisfied With Direction of Personal Life

Gallup has asked a follow-up question since 2001 to measure the extent to which Americans are satisfied or dissatisfied with their personal life. The 65% of U.S. adults who are currently “very satisfied” marks a new high in the two-decade trend.

The more nuanced satisfaction ratings reveal that the relatively small four-percentage-point drop in personal satisfaction from 2007 to 2008 — as the global economic crisis unfolded — obscured greater movement (12 points) in the percentage “very” versus “somewhat” satisfied.

Line graph. Americans’ level of satisfaction with their personal life, 2001-2020.

Income, Political Party, Marital Status the Biggest Factors in Satisfaction

Household income, political party affiliation and marital status are associated with the largest subgroup differences in Americans’ satisfaction with their personal life.

Roughly 95% of Americans who live in high-income households, who identify as Republicans and who are married say they are satisfied with their personal life — and about three in four among each of these groups are very satisfied.

Meanwhile, adults in low-income households are the least likely to say they are satisfied with their life, followed by Democrats and unmarried adults. Among each of these groups, small majorities report being very satisfied. Low-income Americans hold the distinction of having the lowest percentage very satisfied.

Smaller differences in personal satisfaction are seen by race and gender. Whites are a bit more likely than nonwhites to say they are satisfied (92% vs. 86%, respectively) or very satisfied (67% vs. 59%) with their personal life. And men report slightly higher levels of satisfaction than do women.

U.S. Satisfaction With Personal Life, by Subgroup
Ranked by % Satisfied
Satisfied Very satisfied
% %
$100,000+ 96 76
Republicans 93 80
Married 93 74
College graduate only 93 71
Men 92 67
Postgraduate 92 66
Age 18-34 92 62
$40,000-<$100,000 92 66
Whites 92 67
Age 55+ 90 67
Have children under 18 90 68
Have no children under 18 89 64
Some college 89 63
Independents 89 60
Age 35-54 87 63
High school or less 87 62
Women 87 63
Nonwhites 86 59
Unmarried 86 56
Democrats 86 56
<$40,000 80 54
GALLUP, JAN. 2-15, 2020

Bottom Line

It’s likely no coincidence that Americans’ heightened satisfaction with their personal life comes as confidence in the U.S. economy and their personal finances are also at long-term or record highs. That two in three Americans are very satisfied is reflective of this upbeat moment in time, and whether these sentiments carry through the coming decade will be something to watch.

The vast majority of Americans in all major demographic and political subgroups are content with the way their lives are going, but the additional question on how satisfied they are provides more insight. Some groups — wealthier households, Republicans, married people — report especially high levels of satisfaction, while lower-income Americans, Democrats and those who are unmarried report more tepid satisfaction.

View complete question responses and trends.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/284285/new-high-americans-satisfied-personal-life.aspx

 

 

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1392-1393

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1386-1391

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1379-1785

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1372-1378

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1363-1371

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1352-1362

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1343-1351

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1335-1342

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1326-1334

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1318-1325

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1310-1317

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1300-1309

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1291-1299

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1282-1290

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1276-1281

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1267-1275

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1266

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1256-1265

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1246-1255

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1236-1245

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1229-1235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1218-1128

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1210-1217

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1202-1209

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1197-1201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1190-1196

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1182-1189

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1174-1181

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1168-1173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1159-1167

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1151-1158

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1145-1150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1139-1144

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1131-1138

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1122-1130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1112-1121

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1101-1111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1091-1100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1082-1090

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1073-1081

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1066-1073

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1058-1065

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1048-1057

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1041-1047

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1033-1040

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1023-1032

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1017-1022

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1010-1016

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1001-1009

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 993-1000

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 984-992

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 977-983

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 970-976

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 963-969

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 955-962

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 946-954

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 938-945

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 926-937

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 916-925

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 906-915

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 889-896

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 884-888

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 878-883

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 870-877

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 864-869

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 857-863

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 850-856

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 845-849

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 840-844

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 833-839

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 827-832

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 821-826

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 815-820

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 806-814

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 800-805

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 793-799

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 785-792

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 777-784

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 769-776

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 759-768

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 751-758

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 745-750

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 738-744

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 732-737

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 727-731

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 720-726

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 713-719

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 705-712

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 695-704

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 685-694

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 675-684

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 668-674

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 660-667

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 651-659

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 644-650

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 637-643

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 629-636

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 617-628

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 608-616

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 575-584

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 565-574

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 556-564

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 1-9

 

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

The Pronk Pops Show 1392, February 5, 2020, Story 1: President Trump Delivers 2020 State of The Union Address — Videos — Story 2: Lacking Trump Impulse Control — Petulant Pelosi Ripping Up President Trump’s 2020 State of The Union Address– Insults American People and Honored Guests — In Your Guts You Know Pelosi Is Nuts — Trump on Crazy Nancy — Videos — Story 3: Senate Acquits President Trump of Both Articles of Impeachment: Articles 1 Abuse of Power: 52 Votes Not Guilty and 48 Votes Guilty and Articles 2 Obstruction of Congress: Not Guilty 53 Votes and 47 Votes Guilty — Videos —

Posted on February 6, 2020. Filed under: 2020 Democrat Candidates, 2020 President Candidates, 2020 Republican Candidates, Addiction, American History, Bernie Sanders, Breaking News, Bribery, Bribes, Business, Cartoons, Clinton Obama Democrat Criminal Conspiracy, Coal, Communications, Congress, Consitutional Law, Constitutional Law, Corruption, Countries, Crime, Culture, Deep State, Defense Spending, Disasters, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump, Donald Trump, Drugs, Economics, Elections, Elizabeth Warren, Empires, Employment, Energy, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Government, Fifth Amendment, First Amendment, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, Former President Barack Obama, Fourth Amendment, Freedom of Speech, Government, Government Dependency, Government Spending, High Crimes, History, Housing, Human, Human Behavior, Illegal Drugs, Illegal Immigration, Immigration, Impeachment, Independence, Investments, Joe Biden, Law, Legal Drugs, Legal Immigration, Life, Liquid Natural Gas (LNG), Lying, Media, Medicare, Mental Illness, National Interest, National Security Agency, Natural Gas, Natural Gas, News, Oil, People, Pete Buttigieg, Philosophy, Photos, Politics, Polls, President Barack Obama, President Trump, Progressives, Public Corruption, Public Relations, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Resources, Rule of Law, Rush Limbaugh, Scandals, Second Amendment, Senate, Social Networking, Social Science, Social Security, Spying, Spying on American People, Subversion, Success, Surveillance and Spying On American People, Surveillance/Spying, Taxes, Technology, Terror, Terrorism, Trump Surveillance/Spying, U.S. Space Program, Ukraine, Unemployment, United States Constitution, United States of America, Videos, Wealth, Welfare Spending, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,