Queen Ivanka

[thaiboxerken]

Imagine if the year is 1992 and President-elect Bill Clinton meets with a foreign dignitary and Hillary hangs around to do anything other than serve tea and biscuits.

Imagine the year is 2016 and the Clinton's run a charity called the Clinton Foundation......

Yet, Ivanka using daddy's political influence to make money is okay.

 

[lionking]

Imagine the year is 2016 and the Clinton's run a charity called the Clinton Foundation......

Yet, Ivanka using daddy's political influence to make money is okay.

The Trump children were brought up to see every event as an opportunity to make money. The entire family has no class at all.

Not yet president, yet new depths are being plumbed.

 

[a_unique_person]

The Trump children were brought up to see every event as an opportunity to make money. The entire family has no class at all.

Not yet president, yet new depths are being plumbed.

You haven't looked at the pictures? They are all wall to wall class. The biggest, best, brightest mashup of historical class you will ever see.

 

[Minoosh]

No, I meant confidentially, and unless you can tell me what they were discussing, it is the correct description.

Which still leaves me wondering why you assume she's a bimbo.

I think Donald Trump is insecure. He doesn't want to rely on his own memory regarding what is said in meetings. He doesn't want to rely on his own words if he's doing anything other than the ad lib shtick he trotted out at rallies. He trusts Ivanka and Jared, and to a somewhat lesser extent his sons. I don't think he gets why he can't have anyone he wants by his side. For probably the first time in his life he can't do exactly what he feels like doing.

 

[The Atheist]

Which still leaves me wondering why you assume she's a bimbo.

I lost some of that post, in which part I quoted the description for bimbo:

an attractive but unintelligent or frivolous young woman

I have no idea how smart she is but frivolous describes her life perfectly, so I'm pretty happy with it.

I think Donald Trump is insecure.

I agree entirely and have commented on the startled rabbit look he's had since realising the enormousness of his forthcoming task. He was thinking "this is easy" then is suddenly confronted by a job that makes the labours of Hercules look straightforward.

For probably the first time in his life he can't do exactly what he feels like doing.

Except he is doing exactly that.

 

[Minoosh]

I lost some of that post, in which part I quoted the description for bimbo:

an attractive but unintelligent or frivolous young woman

I have no idea how smart she is but frivolous describes her life perfectly, so I'm pretty happy with it.

I'm not seeing frivolity. I see the mother of 3 kids, running a business and helping her high-profile (and high-maintenance) father as he navigates through uncharted territory.

Except he is doing exactly that.

He's trying to have things his way, of course, but there are constraints on the behavior of a POTUS which he is just now realizing.

 

[Darat]

Which still leaves me wondering why you assume she's a bimbo.

I think Donald Trump is insecure. He doesn't want to rely on his own memory regarding what is said in meetings. He doesn't want to rely on his own words if he's doing anything other than the ad lib shtick he trotted out at rallies. He trusts Ivanka and Jared, and to a somewhat lesser extent his sons. I don't think he gets why he can't have anyone he wants by his side. For probably the first time in his life he can't do exactly what he feels like doing.

Is there any evidence yet that supports he now cant do whatever he wants?

 

[Darat]

I'm not seeing frivolity. I see the mother of 3 kids, running a business and helping her high-profile (and high-maintenance) father as he navigates through uncharted territory.

He's trying to have things his way, of course, but there are constraints on the behavior of a POTUS which he is just now realizing.

What constraints is he now feeling?

 

[Cain]

She was the FLOTUS-elect at the time, so would have every reason to be there, as Melania would have in Abe's case.

It depends on the type of meeting. Maybe you're not familiar with American electoral politics in 1992. The Clintons joked about getting two presidents for the price of one, and Republicans raged that she Hillary Rodham would be an unelected, unaccountable influencer (they raged at the role she took in health-care).

If you mean Chelsea Clinton, in 1992, then you'd have an excellent analogy.

Chelsea was a child at the time. If she sat in, then it would have been against her will.

 

[The Atheist]

It depends on the type of meeting. Maybe you're not familiar with American electoral politics in 1992. The Clintons joked about getting two presidents for the price of one, and Republicans raged that she Hillary Rodham would be an unelected, unaccountable influencer (they raged at the role she took in health-care).

Still irrelevant but interesting in pointing out the stupidity of Republicans. When did a FLOTUS not have influence with her husband?

Chelsea was a child at the time. If she sat in, then it would have been against her will.

What an interesting way your mind works. When I was 12, I'd have loved to meet a Prime Minister from another country, and it wouldn't be all that odd if another 12 yo felt the same way, but you've decided it would have been against her will.

 

[Minoosh]

Is there any evidence yet that supports he now cant do whatever he wants?

He got grief for darting out to dinner without the press pool. He can't just hire his family members at will and have them sit in on the daily national security briefing. He's probably not going to be free to dump Melania in the next 4 years, or at least I don't think he'll be worshiped as a studly man's man the way he is used to. Family or staff have had to take the Tweety out of his hands at times, but he seems to have reclaimed it.

What constraints is he now feeling?

I'm not inside his head, but the above come to mind. His blase communication style of lies piled on lies is not going to go over well with U.S. allies (or former allies, possibly, if he wants to go all-in with Russia). I don't think he's going to get away with changing his position from the beginning of a sentence to the end. In myriad ways he will be less free than he was before he got the nomination or the presidency. The additional power and pomp might make up for that, however. Also the money if he cashes in on the office as many expect.

Specifically to relate this to the topic, he is not allowed to make Ivanka or Jared his co-rulers. Even if he wanted to share his daily classified briefings, he probably wouldn't be able to remember the details.

I believe most presidents have had genuinely loyal people around them in official roles to help keep the sovereign's secrets. The way Trump has lived does not IMO inspire genuine loyalty. His family is about it. And I'm not too sure about some of them.

 

[Bob001]

....
He's trying to have things his way, of course, but there are constraints on the behavior of a POTUS which he is just now realizing.

But those constraints are mostly the result of ordinary decency, which Trump rejects. He refused to reveal his tax returns, which has been a routine practice by every other presidential candidate for more than 40 years. He lies about matters of fact, even when video evidence proves his lies. The President is exempt from conflict-of-interest laws; he can do almost literally anything he wants, including promoting his businesses around the world, and claim it's legal. Ditching the press reveals a contempt for the public's basic right to know. With a Republican House and Senate, there are no real constraints or restraints on Trump's behavior.

 

[Cain]

What an interesting way your mind works. When I was 12, I'd have loved to meet a Prime Minister from another country, and it wouldn't be all that odd if another 12 yo felt the same way, but you've decided it would have been against her will.

I almost envy the cluelessness that powers your opinions. Maybe as a complete nobody you would have loved to meet the Prime Minister of Japan when you were 12, or more probably, you would like to now imagine it was your pre-teen disposition to quietly remain seated with old people while Nintendo beckoned. Chelsea Clinton grew up in a governor's mansion, and endured a long campaign season (where parents tried to shield her from most of the hoopla).

 

[Darat]

But those constraints are mostly the result of ordinary decency, which Trump rejects. He refused to reveal his tax returns, which has been a routine practice by every other presidential candidate for more than 40 years. He lies about matters of fact, even when video evidence proves his lies. The President is exempt from conflict-of-interest laws; he can do almost literally anything he wants, including promoting his businesses around the world, and claim it's legal. Ditching the press reveals a contempt for the public's basic right to know. With a Republican House and Senate, there are no real constraints or restraints on Trump's behavior.

You've got to the root of the matter, Trump simply cares not one jot about anyone else and is so self centred and egoistic that he seems actually incapable of shame.

 

[The Atheist]

Chelsea Clinton grew up in a governor's mansion, and endured a long campaign season (where parents tried to shield her from most of the hoopla).

Nonsense removed.

You do contradict yourself neatly. On one hand, they were sheltering her, yet if she'd been sitting with the Japanese PM, it would have been against her will.

It's always funny when people have no argument but are still determined to be contrary.

 

[Cain]

Nonsense removed.

You do contradict yourself neatly. On one hand, they were sheltering her, yet if she'd been sitting with the Japanese PM, it would have been against her will.

Spoken like a graduate from the George W. Bush school of debate -- you forgot Poland. I said she wouldn't be there; accepting your bogus premise, if she had been there, then it likely would've been against her will.

It's always funny when people have no argument but are still determined to be contrary.

This has more to do with you being wrong at every turn. It's easy: stop saying silly things.

 

[Belz...]

At least the queen is going to be fabulous.

 

[The Atheist]

... then it likely would've been against her will. .

So, having run out of projection you finally shift the goalposts? Still, at least you're partly admitting your error.

 

[a_unique_person]

So, having run out of projection you finally shift the goalposts? Still, at least you're partly admitting your error.

I'm sorry. Were you taking Caine seriously?

 

[Cain]

So, having run out of projection you finally shift the goalposts? Still, at least you're partly admitting your error.

The only errors are your own. If there are two reasons against something, you seem to think there's a contradiction. You're arguing like the sort moron who imitates TV lawyers: "So which one is it?" No, it's just one on top of the other. In addition to learning what a conditional statement is, you might want to read up on what it means to move goalposts.