Human resources
-
Stable Genius wrote:
Trump personal lawyer: Guilty (Michael Cohen)
Who has directly implicated Cheeto Benito in a conspiracy to violate campaign finance laws. And lets not forget
Quote:
Rep. Chris Collins was indicted for insider trading by the feds. He was the first GOP Representative to endorse Donald Trump. Rep. Duncan Hunter, under indictment for misusing campaign funds, was the second GOP Representative to endorse Donald Trump.
Before the oath, Trump has managed to surpass 2nd term Nixon for paranoia, 2nd term Reagan for corruption & 2nd term Bush for incompetence.--R. Schooley No principle of free speech requires anybody to be given access to a particular forum where access is inherently restricted. - Scott Lemieux The president fired the FBI director to obstruct a federal investigation into possible collusion with a foreign power to fix an election. - Jesse Berney
-
Let's make a summary so far of the people, who worked most closely with the current POTUS: Trump campaign manager: Guilty (Michael Flynn) Trump deputy campaign manager: Guilty (Rick Gates) Trump personal lawyer: Guilty (Michael Cohen) Trump National Security Advisor: Guilty (Paul Manafort) Trump foreign policy advisor: Guilty (George Papadopoulos) Lots of bona fide witches, they didn't have their own mail servers though. And of course the Donald didn't know anything about ... well ... anything.
They buy shoes, then they wear them! They make them sound old! Dairy! Dairy!
-
Manafort and Gate's crimes predated their association with Trump's campaign and Trump fired Manafort when the allegations came to light. I don't see how that is much of a reflection on Trump.
He did make a statement during the campaign that he only hires the best people.
-
Manafort and Gate's crimes predated their association with Trump's campaign and Trump fired Manafort when the allegations came to light. I don't see how that is much of a reflection on Trump.
He surrounded himself with criminals. I am pretty sure if that had been the case with Clinton or Obama, you would have gone apeshit.
-
Let's make a summary so far of the people, who worked most closely with the current POTUS: Trump campaign manager: Guilty (Michael Flynn) Trump deputy campaign manager: Guilty (Rick Gates) Trump personal lawyer: Guilty (Michael Cohen) Trump National Security Advisor: Guilty (Paul Manafort) Trump foreign policy advisor: Guilty (George Papadopoulos) Lots of bona fide witches, they didn't have their own mail servers though. And of course the Donald didn't know anything about ... well ... anything.
They buy shoes, then they wear them! They make them sound old! Dairy! Dairy!
-
Let's make a summary so far of the people, who worked most closely with the current POTUS: Trump campaign manager: Guilty (Michael Flynn) Trump deputy campaign manager: Guilty (Rick Gates) Trump personal lawyer: Guilty (Michael Cohen) Trump National Security Advisor: Guilty (Paul Manafort) Trump foreign policy advisor: Guilty (George Papadopoulos) Lots of bona fide witches, they didn't have their own mail servers though. And of course the Donald didn't know anything about ... well ... anything.
They buy shoes, then they wear them! They make them sound old! Dairy! Dairy!
I think it's pretty much a given that anyone in Trump's position is going to have something unsavoury in their past - Lord Acton's quote on power summing it up fairly well. I think the more interesting question is perhaps how undermining of the law and also, what is generally termed, natural morality his actions have been.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
He surrounded himself with criminals. I am pretty sure if that had been the case with Clinton or Obama, you would have gone apeshit.
Hillary Clinton's husband is a rapist. The pair of them fraudulently run a charity. Clinton threatened national security by running her own email server. And wasn't Obama fined for about $2m worth of campaign donation irregularities? The FBI have had a hard-on for Trump since he got elected and if you shake enough trees eventually something will fall. The difference is that Trump and his crew have been under immense scrutiny and there is a strong motivation to "get" them. Clinton however has been given a free ride. If you really don't think Clinton and her whole family are also surrounded by crooks then that's pretty naive. Most politicians are crooks in some way, the pathological desire for power regularly goes hand-in-hand with corruption.
-
Hillary Clinton's husband is a rapist. The pair of them fraudulently run a charity. Clinton threatened national security by running her own email server. And wasn't Obama fined for about $2m worth of campaign donation irregularities? The FBI have had a hard-on for Trump since he got elected and if you shake enough trees eventually something will fall. The difference is that Trump and his crew have been under immense scrutiny and there is a strong motivation to "get" them. Clinton however has been given a free ride. If you really don't think Clinton and her whole family are also surrounded by crooks then that's pretty naive. Most politicians are crooks in some way, the pathological desire for power regularly goes hand-in-hand with corruption.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
The pair of them fraudulently run a charity
Trump also does. [Michael Cohen hit with subpoena in case alleging Trump charity violations | US news | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/22/michael-cohen-subpoena-trump-foundation-charity-investigation)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
The FBI have had a hard-on for Trump since he got elected
For a reason. And don't tell me the bullshit reason that this is a Democrat conspiracy. Both Comey and Mueller are Republican.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Clinton threatened national security
[Remember this?](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/us/politics/trump-russia-clinton-emails.html)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Most politicians are crooks in some way
Agreed.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
the pathological desire for power regularly goes hand-in-hand with corruption
It does.
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
The pair of them fraudulently run a charity
Trump also does. [Michael Cohen hit with subpoena in case alleging Trump charity violations | US news | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/22/michael-cohen-subpoena-trump-foundation-charity-investigation)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
The FBI have had a hard-on for Trump since he got elected
For a reason. And don't tell me the bullshit reason that this is a Democrat conspiracy. Both Comey and Mueller are Republican.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Clinton threatened national security
[Remember this?](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/13/us/politics/trump-russia-clinton-emails.html)
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Most politicians are crooks in some way
Agreed.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
the pathological desire for power regularly goes hand-in-hand with corruption
It does.
The Centrist wrote:
Agreed.
Which means your "outrage" over this is not rational, mere bias and another example of trump Derangement Syndrome.
-
The Centrist wrote:
Agreed.
Which means your "outrage" over this is not rational, mere bias and another example of trump Derangement Syndrome.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
trump Derangement Syndrome
That is a mental disease affecting Trump supporters. Bigly.
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
trump Derangement Syndrome
That is a mental disease affecting Trump supporters. Bigly.
-
Hillary Clinton's husband is a rapist. The pair of them fraudulently run a charity. Clinton threatened national security by running her own email server. And wasn't Obama fined for about $2m worth of campaign donation irregularities? The FBI have had a hard-on for Trump since he got elected and if you shake enough trees eventually something will fall. The difference is that Trump and his crew have been under immense scrutiny and there is a strong motivation to "get" them. Clinton however has been given a free ride. If you really don't think Clinton and her whole family are also surrounded by crooks then that's pretty naive. Most politicians are crooks in some way, the pathological desire for power regularly goes hand-in-hand with corruption.
someday one will offer an argument where defending trump is done by not showing how less coruppted than Clintons.someday.
I do not fear of failure. I fear of giving up out of frustration.
-
Manafort and Gate's crimes predated their association with Trump's campaign and Trump fired Manafort when the allegations came to light. I don't see how that is much of a reflection on Trump.
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
I don't see how that is much of a reflection on Trump.
He said during the election that he was going to put "smart" people in charge. And he knew a lot of "smart" people that no one even knew about. Certainly one definition of a "smart" person would be either that they don't commit crimes or that they do so in a way that they do not get caught.
-
Hillary Clinton's husband is a rapist. The pair of them fraudulently run a charity. Clinton threatened national security by running her own email server. And wasn't Obama fined for about $2m worth of campaign donation irregularities? The FBI have had a hard-on for Trump since he got elected and if you shake enough trees eventually something will fall. The difference is that Trump and his crew have been under immense scrutiny and there is a strong motivation to "get" them. Clinton however has been given a free ride. If you really don't think Clinton and her whole family are also surrounded by crooks then that's pretty naive. Most politicians are crooks in some way, the pathological desire for power regularly goes hand-in-hand with corruption.
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
Clinton however has been given a free ride.
As long as it is free then please do give me the 20 million that Congress spent on the Benghazi investigation.
jschell wrote:
As long as it is free then please do give me the 20 million that Congress spent on the Benghazi investigation.
Yeah, sorry, you're right, the FBI and the media hounded Clinton just as much as they have Trump.
-
F-ES Sitecore wrote:
I don't see how that is much of a reflection on Trump.
He said during the election that he was going to put "smart" people in charge. And he knew a lot of "smart" people that no one even knew about. Certainly one definition of a "smart" person would be either that they don't commit crimes or that they do so in a way that they do not get caught.
So you're criticising Trump for how he dealt with something he knew nothing about? Trump Derangement Syndrome.
-
someday one will offer an argument where defending trump is done by not showing how less coruppted than Clintons.someday.
I do not fear of failure. I fear of giving up out of frustration.
Mohibur Rashid wrote:
someday one will offer an argument where defending trump is done by not showing how less coruppted than Clintons.someday.
I wasn't defending Trump. Someone said that if Clinton had been mired in scandal then such-and-such and I was responding to say how she *was* mired in scandal, ergo their argument was void. Anyone not criticising Trump being labelled as "defending" or "supporting" or "a far right racist fascist bigot" are all normal symptoms of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
-
So you're criticising Trump for how he dealt with something he knew nothing about? Trump Derangement Syndrome.
-
jschell wrote:
Your response has nothing to do with what I said.
oh irony... This kind of a flashback[^] :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.