have evolved. it became part of the expectations. so no, i never did say that it wasn t one of the critical elements. at the same time, i consistently said i didn t think it should be repealed on the principle that it is too early to start undoing this. there is another factor, the restriction on the derivatives, giving them to the banks, well, if we have in place a very strong rule that keeps banks from doing this, that may after some years of experience lead you to a different conclusion. but we re not there yet. so this is frankly a fairly hypocritical invocation of me, the imputation of me, of great wisdom, which i never noticed when i was there. no, it was out of context, i never voted for the bill, i was against the bill. and i called maxine waters,
the markets believe that we are not going to do the big things on medicare and revenue that are going to be necessary for the long run. yeah, it s fine to believe that something terrible could happen, but it s a pure imputation of motives for which there s no evidence to believe that spending on the economy right now is going to make the difference. i was trying to put forward the krugman view, and he said which in some ways he thinks is also the administration view. and he said look, the problem here is what these guys are trying to, do the keynesians, the people who want to spend march money march money is they re trying to reflate the economy and pump it back to where it was in 2005, 2006, 2007, but that was all unsustainable, you re trying to stop these mortgages from being foreclosed but people had bought houses they couldn t pay for, you re trying to somehow get people borrowing again, but they were borrowing too much, why are
now is not going to rescue us if the markets believe that we are not going to do the big things on medicare and revenue that are going to be necessary for the long run. yeah, it s fine to believe that something terrible could happen, but it s a pure imputation of motives for which there s no evidence to believe that spending on the economy right now is going to make the difference. i was trying to put forward the krugman view, and he said which in some ways he thinks is also the administration view. and he said look, the problem here is what these guys are trying to, do the keynesians, the people who want to spend march money is they re trying to reflate the economy and pump it back to where it was in 2005, 2006, 2007, but that was all unsustainable, you re trying to stop these mortgages from being foreclosed but people had bought houses they couldn t pay for, you re trying to somehow get people borrowing again, but they were borrowing too much, why are
so by issuing a pardon on friday night to former sheriff joe arpaio, president trump got joe arpaio to confess his guilt by accepting that pardon. 102 years ago, the united states supreme court said that a pardon, quote, carries an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it. so one thing that you don t hear from presidents who issue pardons is that the person pardoned did nothing wrong because the person pardoned has just admitted guilt. but that s what president trump seems to want us to believe about joe arpaio. in a brief press conference with the president of finland today, president trump offered a childish defense of his pardon of joe arpaio. the president didn t actually defend his pardon as much as he attacked what he said were the bad pardons issued by previous