• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Trump Presidency VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Minoosh said:
Tweeted by Sanders:

Talk about a non-denial denial. After "plans" or "future" the next obvious phrase is "that I don't?" but she refrains from saying that. CBS was pretty damn sure of itself on this, and she does nothing to scuttle such talk.

I don't think this is good for Trump. Sooner or later even his supporters might start to wonder why he's such a wrecking ball when it comes to keeping staff. Also telling is that Sanders is checking her phone while at her daughter's kindergarten event (and don't call it a "graduation," that's snowflake-speak), but I suppose because of her job she has to sign up for updates and so forth. God forbid she can just be a parent for an hour.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure why you can’t understand the words she writes but it looks like she loves her job. As far as people leaving, no president has dealt with the enemies this president has, in light of that, who the hell would want to stick with that. What it does show is how strong this president is in having to deal with the onslaught.
 
logger said:
I’m not sure why you can’t understand the words she writes but it looks like she loves her job. As far as people leaving, no president has dealt with the enemies this president has, in light of that, who the hell would want to stick with that. What it does show is how strong this president is in having to deal with the onslaught.
Click to expand...

She didn't deny the story.
 
Segnosaur said:
It used to be that working in the white house could be a career boost... something to proudly put on your resume. Now? Not so much.

From: https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/po...-less-boost/BSNVmebfnTFzjzoxB77bII/story.html
The big corporations where jobs come with mid-six-figure salaries have largely avoided the top tier of former Trump staffers. One company that picked a former top Trump aide to be its chief executive tried to paper over the association, leaving the word “Trump” off the press release when announcing the hire.
Click to expand...

Last stories of that sort of thing were for folks that worked under Nixon. But Toupee Fiasco is pretty deeply despised despite not being essentially forced out of office (yet). This should surprise exactly nobody who knew of his complete failure to join "high society Manhattan".

Captain_Swoop said:
Standby for 'What about the Clinton Foundation?"
Click to expand...

It's reasonable to throw rotten food, drinks, and possibly beer bottles at anyone who does so.
 
Mumbles said:
And go to work where? Outside of possibly publishing a book in the latter's case, I mean.

No ordinary place will likely touch them because, you know, worked for Dolt 45. One is brown and the other not a leggy blonde, so Fox News is out.

I'm not saying they wouldn't leave for mental health or some such, but aren't their prospects limited?
Click to expand...

Any number of right-wing organizations would be proud to bring them aboard. They could go on speaking tours in Trump country. They probably have more options now than before they went to work for Dear Leader. Sean Spicer went to work for a Trump superPAC.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-sean-spicer-super-pac-20180614-story.html
 
logger said:
I’m not sure why you can’t understand the words she writes but it looks like she loves her job.
Click to expand...
Not enough to stay, apparently, but if I'm wrong you can say "I told you so" and I'll be fine with it. (Often BTW the source for these stories is the subject themselves; attributing it to friends is a form of cover - the friends know they are allowed to disclose it.) CBS had no attribution with its headline. That's often a hallmark of TRUTH. Not always, but often.

I wouldn't be surprised if her own dad told her to get out from under this oaf (figuratively speaking).

logger said:
As far as people leaving, no president has dealt with the enemies this president has, in light of that, who the hell would want to stick with that.
Click to expand...
Um ... someone loyal? But that's not her fault. Trump doesn't inspire that kind of loyalty, except among people who have never actually met the guy.

As far as no president ever having such enemies, you're wrong; Obama had plenty, among them more straight-up racists than I ever would have believed existed in this country. (You can look it up: I started a thread about how startled I was when the New Yorker first wrote about his Trump's fervent support from white supremacists.) Obama also had the entire GOP vowing to never support anything he proposed, period. Even when they could have crafted a better stimulus bill, they simply refused to play. Even when looking at a conservative approach to health-care reform they refused. AFAIK Dems have never made that same declaration. If they'd ever seen a replacement for Obamacare I think they would have at least looked at it. But oops, no replacement.

logger said:
What it does show is how strong this president is in having to deal with the onslaught.
Click to expand...
That's your interpretation and you're welcome to it.
 
Last edited:
Trump tweets

"The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!..."

"....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle."
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump tweets

"The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!..."

"....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle."
Click to expand...

Trump? Hyperbole? Nah, never happen.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump tweets

"The sleazy New York Democrats, and their now disgraced (and run out of town) A.G. Eric Schneiderman, are doing everything they can to sue me on a foundation that took in $18,800,000 and gave out to charity more money than it took in, $19,200,000. I won’t settle this case!..."

"....Schneiderman, who ran the Clinton campaign in New York, never had the guts to bring this ridiculous case, which lingered in their office for almost 2 years. Now he resigned his office in disgrace, and his disciples brought it when we would not settle."
Click to expand...

How could it pay out more than it took in? :confused:
 
Darat said:
How could it pay out more than it took in? :confused:
Click to expand...

When the truth matters not, why would you expect the math to add up?


Trump has been pretending he donates to lots to charities and he uses this Foundation as 'evidence' even though he hasn't put any of his own money into the charity for a decade or more.
 
Last edited:
Darat said:
How could it pay out more than it took in? :confused:
Click to expand...

Well, Trump is this really generous guy, see. With a really strong social conscience. He cannot stand to see underprivileged people suffer so he adds money from his own personal funds. And he is so humble that he does this secretly so that people will not praise him for it.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
I'm a bit behind, but this honestly seems incredibly ignorant to me.
You fear his brand of civility becoming more pervasive? We should take the moral high to avoid being beaten by Trump?
What?
You do realize that we're talking about the current President of the United States of America? The moral high ground already failed against him.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I did not word it properly. I wasn't referring to the democratic party being beaten in elections. I'm saying that if you allow yourself, personally, to descend to his level you've already lost. It's been argued here that it's worth doing that if it means getting rid of him. That sounds to me something like the equivalent of justifying the use of torture as a means of preserving national security. A subversion of principles for a higher cause.

I think you can and should achieve beating Trump without becoming him.
 
TofuFighter said:
It's been argued here that it's worth doing that if it means getting rid of him. That sounds to me something like the equivalent of justifying the use of torture as a means of preserving national security. A subversion of principles for a higher cause.
Click to expand...

Perhaps more to the point - nobody posting anything here is going to have even the tiniest bit of influence in whether or not Trump stays in office.
 
TofuFighter said:
Perhaps I did not word it properly. I wasn't referring to the democratic party being beaten in elections. I'm saying that if you allow yourself, personally, to descend to his level you've already lost. It's been argued here that it's worth doing that if it means getting rid of him. That sounds to me something like the equivalent of justifying the use of torture as a means of preserving national security. A subversion of principles for a higher cause.

I think you can and should achieve beating Trump without becoming him.
Click to expand...
Yes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom