Protection program and businesses of all sizes have started to use the tax tools that we provided for their liquidity. But in that time the critics have also done what they do best. They criticize. The need came has seized on an opportunity to perpetuate every negative story that critics can manufacture. You can imagine my surprise when democrats criticized the net operating loss carryback provisions in the cares act. Because oddly democrats previously supported the last three bills where we expanded the net operating loss carrybacks in 2002, 2005, and even in 2009 with all democrat rule. So i dont recall in any of those instances any partisan attacks from democrats about this previously bipartisan, antirecessionary policy tools. So why now . Sadly, that irresponsibility has led our democratic colleagues in the house to pass legislation that would take back important tax tools that we have provided in the cares act to the tune of 254 billion, and thats a tax increase on the american bu
Senate to talk about how the tragic spread of the coronavirus around the world underscored the need for us to focus on the persistent challenge of china not playing by the rules. Now, in the case of coronavirus that was about china not telling the World Health Organization, not telling other countries, not telling their own people what was happening in terms of the coronavirus, not taking steps to stop International Travel early on. That wasnt playing by the w. H. O. Rules, the World Health Organization rules, and the result has been devastation. It has been the spread of the virus and so much of that devastation weve seen around the globe, in my view could have been avoided had they played by the rules. Unfortunately not playing by the rules applies to china in many other areas too. We talked about trade allot on this floor of the senate to be sure that theres a level Playing Field between china and the United States and making sure they play by the International Trading rules. But he
Persistent challenge of china not playing by the rules. In the case of coronavirus, that was about china not telling the World Health Organization, not telling other countries, not telling their own people what was happening in terms of the coronavirus, not taking steps to stop International Travel early on. That wasnt playing by the who rules, the World Health Organization rules and the result has been devastation. Its been the spread of the virus and so much of that devastation weve seen around the globe in my view could have been avoided. Had they played by the rules. Unfortunately, not playing by the rules applies to china in many other areas, too. Weve talked about trade a lot on this floor of the senate to be sure theres a level Playing Field between china and the United States and making sure they play by the International Trading rules, but here is another one, where china and the Chinese Communist party has not played by the rules. And thats with regard to obtaining our intell
Caroline still with us, anna barton. You were saying that really at the moment, the risk on nature is there in the market. Was it right to be . I wanted to talk about technology but it seems to fail me and i needed it. An investor who is sick exposure in a passive way should be aware of. Five isosure to top over 20 . How stocks have already outperformed and are trading at a premium. I think ultimately what you were alluding to is growth is the ultimate structural winner. I dont mean it as a style call. The names that have seen higher levels today, they can continue to do well irrespective of that cyclical recovery we are looking for because they are enabling that next leg of growth. We can talk more about the industries that we like. I think that is the ultimate decision that investors have to make, assess the and growth opportunities. Basise on an individual individual basis, we are looking at a huge percentage of stocks above the key shortterm and mediumterm averages. Here is one exa
Irs Whistle Blowers saying something coming to government treat the bidens different and informant claiming the biden family had been bribed. Should you ignore that or investigate that. Only way to investigate is impeach inquiry and the committee has the power to get all the documents they need. Paul lets bring in Wall Street Journal columnist kim sto is, sle and strossle and brian mcgun. They didnt seem to agree on the terms of the agreement. Its a first for me. What why did they not think on the same page here . Yeah, i mean, its absolutely mind boggling, paul. But, look, the central issue seems to be whether or not there was a Wink Nod Deal between the two the judge exposed specifically over the question of whether or not hunter biden was getting an Immunity Agreement related to other charges in the investigation. There was a paragraph in the Diversion Deal laying that out. Hunters team clearly viewed as completely making him immune from future charges and the problem that the prose