Jose Canseco
✔
@JoseCanseco
Hey little buddy @realDonaldTrump u need a bash brother for Chief if Staff. Got a secret reorg plan already. Also worried about you looking more like a Twinkie everyday. I will buff you up daily workouts. DM me. #yeswecanseco
23.2K
7:34 PM - Dec 12, 2018
c_hawkbob wrote:One problem solved:
Jose Canseco
✔
@JoseCanseco
Hey little buddy @realDonaldTrump u need a bash brother for Chief if Staff. Got a secret reorg plan already. Also worried about you looking more like a Twinkie everyday. I will buff you up daily workouts. DM me. #yeswecanseco
23.2K
7:34 PM - Dec 12, 2018
RiverDog wrote:Well, let's see if we can go through all of this.
First, the Republican-led Senate voted unanimously rebuked his weak response to the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia's obvious involvement in the Khashoggi murder. They will likely pass some sort of sanctions or cut off military sales.
Next, he can't find a replacement for his Chief of Staff, the latest to have said no is reportedly to be former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, once one of Trump's biggest supporters. He's down to family members.
Then Trump was implicated by his own Justice Department in the hush money funds paid to two women prior to the election. And what's Trump's lawyer Rudy G's defense? "“Nobody got killed, nobody got robbed …". I'm sure that will influence a lot of Senators.
Lots of foreign entities TRIED to do a lot of things. How is this reflective of Trump in any way?A Russian spy plead guilty to trying to infiltrate the NRA and conservative candidates in the Republican Party, including Trump.
And if that's not bad enough, the SDNY is opening another investigation to determine if there was a pay-to-play scheme in connection with contributions to Trump’s inauguration fund (sounds like the Clinton Foundation).
Even the First Lady's popularity plunged by 11 points.
A
Time for him to take a vacation. A really long one.
Jose Canseco
✔
@JoseCanseco
Hey little buddy @realDonaldTrump u need a bash brother for Chief if Staff. Got a secret reorg plan already. Also worried about you looking more like a Twinkie everyday. I will buff you up daily workouts. DM me. #yeswecanseco
23.2K
7:34 PM - Dec 12, 2018
c_hawkbob wrote:One problem solved:
idhawkman wrote:Next, he can't find a replacement for his Chief of Staff, the latest to have said no is reportedly to be former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, once one of Trump's biggest supporters. He's down to family members.
More unnamed sources? Do you know who he is interviewing? If so, post the link.
Merry Christmas everyone. Have a safe, healthy, prosperous New Year, too.
RiverDog wrote:
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie said on Friday that he doesn't want to be Donald Trump's next chief of staff, leaving the president with a dwindling list of candidates and underscoring the chaos of the search for the top West Wing aide.
Christie, an early Trump supporter who led the White House transition effort before being ousted, made the announcement just a day after he met with the president to discuss possibly taking the role. Christie's firm statement also came shortly after reports emerged that he was the front-runner for the job, showing how quickly contenders' odds can rise and fall.
idhawkman wrote:So "reports" say he was the front runner. I imagine that's unnamed reports? How do they know if he was the front runner? Maybe.... The president said you are going to have to keep up with me and go just as hard as I do on 4 hours of sleep a night for two years. It wore out your predecessor but do you think you're up to the job. Answer: Nope, not me. Find someone else that wants to work those hours for the $187k per year that he'd make.
I'm not sure Christie would have been the right guy for him though. In fact, if it was Christie I would have been disappointed.
RiverDog wrote:
You asked for a link and I gave you one. You can believe it if you want, or do like you usually do and call it fake news. At least it references my thoughts on the matter, which is more than you ever do.
In this particular case, I don't think there's any doubt that Trump is having a hard time filling the Chief of Staff position. Just why is anyone's guess.
burrrton wrote:I don't mean this as yet another defense of Trump, but you guys force me into it:
Does it feel wrong to knock Trump for having trouble hiring someone when literally everyone knows half the country is going to go after any new hire as OMG LITERALLY HITLER™ for the rest of his/her natural life?
It's the difficulty he's having finding a replacement.
burrrton wrote:I understand- what I'm saying is from a disinterested party, it looks like that could be due more to how that person will be treated than to how that person feels about Trump.
When administration members are being chased out of restaurants and sitting US Reps are advocating never giving them a moment's peace, that looks like a pretty good reason to consider carefully whether to accept a position.
And before any of you pat yourselves on the back for that accomplishment, let me point out how counter-productive it is for the country. Good candidates being less likely to help gives us a less competent administration, something you should hardly welcome if you think Trump is a buffoon.
burrrton wrote:I don't mean this as yet another defense of Trump, but you guys force me into it:
Does it feel wrong to knock Trump for having trouble hiring someone when literally everyone knows half the country is going to go after any new hire as OMG LITERALLY HITLER™ for the rest of his/her natural life?
Hawktawk wrote:No Burton you do mean it as a defense of trump, you do it all the time.You carry his water almost as well as ID Hawkman.
Hawktawk wrote:Not only that but you're dead wrong about why people are leery of serving in this administration. Look at Reince Priebus, first chief of staff and former party chairman who was as responsible for the jackass getting elected as was Vlad Putin for allowing 16 dwarves to hang around and let Rump siphon off winner take all states with 15-20% of the vote while they knocked each other out. He wound up getting dumped out of a plane literally along the runway in a rainstorm with no limo to haul him away. HR McMaster, military hero and general thrown away without fanfare.
Hawktawk wrote:What person in his or her right mind would want to take any position with the crazy orange witch?
Oh but i guess Im wetting the bed again Burrton right?![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
RiverDog wrote:Sure, some people are leaving because they were disillusioned by serving with Trump. It happens in all administrations, perhaps more so in this one than previous ones. But you can't make a generalized statement because we don't always know why people have left. Some may have agreed in advance to only serve so long. My gut tells me that more are leaving because they can't work for Trump and that as a result he has a smaller pool of talent to draw from than previous POTUS's, but it's only my impression and something I can't prove.
RiverDog wrote:Nice spin, but you're putting lipstick on a pig. If this was a good week for Trump, I'd hate to see what a bad week looks like.
But then again, this past week could look stellar when contrasted with what lies ahead for him in 2019.
idhawkman wrote:Any week you can overturn the signature legislation from the previous administration's 8 years of work can not be classified as a "BAD WEEK". Sorry, it just doesn't compute. That doesn't mean it is a good week necessarily but it can't be a bad week.
No Burton you do mean it as a defense of trump, you do it all the time.You carry his water almost as well as ID Hawkman.
Oh but i guess Im wetting the bed again Burrton right?
Any week you can overturn the signature legislation from the previous administration's 8 years of work can not be classified as a "BAD WEEK".
RiverDog wrote:As a matter of fact, the court ruling could be interpreted as really bad news as now the R's are going to have to replace it with something, which considering that the Dems control the House, is going to be a Herculean task. The two sides can't agree on the time of day let alone something as complex as Obamacare.
idhawkman wrote:Any week you can overturn the signature legislation from the previous administration's 8 years of work can not be classified as a "BAD WEEK". Sorry, it just doesn't compute. That doesn't mean it is a good week necessarily but it can't be a bad week.
RiverDog wrote:
Surely you aren't crediting Trump with the court's decision to rule Obamacare as unconstitutional? And 8 years of work? It was passed in March of 2010, a little over a year after Obama took office. Besides, it's going to be appealed, and may very well end up in SCOTUS. It's far from dead. You're over dramatizing.
But I do agree that it was some good news for conservatives in an otherwise horrible week, but it's nothing of Trump's doing and has zero effect on his current predicament. As a matter of fact, the court ruling could be interpreted as really bad news as now the R's are going to have to replace it with something, which considering that the Dems control the House, is going to be a Herculean task. The two sides can't agree on the time of day let alone something as complex as Obamacare.
RiverDog wrote:As a matter of fact, the court ruling could be interpreted as really bad news as now the R's are going to have to replace it with something, which considering that the Dems control the House, is going to be a Herculean task. The two sides can't agree on the time of day let alone something as complex as Obamacare.
burrrton wrote:
Yup, and they've had 2 years to get something in place and couldn't, or wouldn't, do so. Ridiculous failure.
idhawkman wrote:Remember it was the established republicans that didn't allow for the reform of Obamacare so Trump had no choice but to bring it down entirely. Now they both have to go to work to get a replacement in place.
My guess is scotus slaps this judge down .
If not it’s chaos and makes trumps bad 2 years even worse
Hawktawk wrote:Obamacare is going back to the SCOTUS and let’s recall a *conservative * court upheld it due to Roberts reversal of opinion . I wasn’t a fan of Obama or his signature legislation but nearly 8 years in and 20 million insured it’s tough to take a car doing 100 Mph and put it in reverse . My guess is scotus slaps this judge down . If not it’s chaos and makes trumps bad 2 years even worse
idhawkman wrote:Remember it was the established republicans that didn't allow for the reform of Obamacare so Trump had no choice but to bring it down entirely. Now they both have to go to work to get a replacement in place.
RiverDog wrote:Once again, Trump had nothing to do with this court ruling.
It was filed by 20 state attorney generals, not the Trump Administration.
Next thing we know, you'll be giving Trump credit for landing a man on the moon.
Secondly, it is far from having been "brought down." This is just one court ruling. You can bet your last nickel that it will be appealed, and in all likelihood, wind up in front of the Supreme Court.
I was against Obamacare when they first proposed it, but now that we have it, we can't just "take it down" without a viable replacement as too many people have become dependent on it.
Hawktawk wrote:Obamacare is going back to the SCOTUS and let’s recall a *conservative * court upheld it due to Roberts reversal of opinion . I wasn’t a fan of Obama or his signature legislation but nearly 8 years in and 20 million insured it’s tough to take a car doing 100 Mph and put it in reverse . My guess is scotus slaps this judge down . If not it’s chaos and makes trumps bad 2 years even worse
The states had no basis until Trumps Tax Reform Bill. But hey, maybe it is a good thing not to blame Trump for it. Maybe he can just sit back and say, "didn't do this" and tell Congress just to fix it. ...but we both know better.RiverDog wrote:
The Trump Administration had absouletly nothing to do with this decision. The lawsuit was filed by 20 states.
If left up to you this would never happen since you like gridlock and nothing being done. I know on the other hand that you have more knowledge of civics than you let on with this blather statement. You know having a simple majority in the Senate will create only partisan bills which won't last the test of time - witness the existing law. This must be a bi-partisan effort if it is to SERVE the American people. That said, we know the dems will NEVER give Trump another win on an issue as big as this one and that is the real road block to progress.If Obama Care is eventually taken down, they are almost certainly going to have to replace it with something, and with the current configuration/climate in Washington, it's unlikely that they'll come up with a permanent solution. The only way we're going to get a replacement is if one party controls both the Legislative and Executive branches. That's how we ended up with Obama Care in the first place. The Republicans blew their chance.
IMO at this point, we're better off leaving it alone for now.
idhawkman wrote:IMO at this point, we're better off leaving it alone for now.
It left alone, it will be THE issue in the 2020 election.
idhawkman wrote:IMO at this point, we're better off leaving it alone for now.
It left alone, it will be THE issue in the 2020 election.
As of now, it is all of it after this year since enrollment just ended.RiverDog wrote:
Depends on how much, if any, of Obama Care is overturned by the courts.
RiverDog wrote:Uh oh. More bad news:
The Trump Foundation — the charitable foundation started by President Donald Trump years before he became a presidential candidate, which New York's top prosecutor said exhibited a "shocking pattern of illegality" — will dissolve according to a court filing.
"Our petition detailed a shocking pattern of illegality involving the Trump Foundation — including unlawful coordination with the Trump presidential campaign, repeated and willful self-dealing, and much more," Underwood said in a statement. "This amounted to the Trump Foundation functioning as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests."
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump ... spartanntp
Let me try to guess Idahawkman's spin: A) Fake News! B) It's not illegal! C) This doesn't have anything to do with Donald Trump! D) This is just one more example of the main street media overdramatizing a story!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests