Rancid wrote:Why is this an interesting response? Do you disagree with the statement or not?
I think it's a question of degree, and that's why it has never been regulated. Until the Clintons, nobody had ever tried to turn a post presidency into an influence peddling business with an elaborate legal defense for the purpose of making tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, that was why they ended up creating a nice stipend for ex presidents, as I think some ended up in financial trouble--e.g., Harry Truman being the most recent. As for the Bidens, it's not clear how you would regulate something like that. It's not the clear case of nepotism that appointing your family member to a government post would indicate. Yet, there is a clear case of Biden family members profiting from a public office held by Joe Biden. This is why I think politicians of all stripes are uncomfortable with what Trump is doing in investigating Biden: more specifically, I think there are a lot of politicians in Washington whose children profit from a public office they hold. So you get highly partisan charges from people like jimjam who are certain in spite of a lack of evidence that Trump is lining his own pockets or that of his family without a shred of evidence to support it--innuendo or the appearance of a conflict of interest is sufficient proof to establish guilt with the likes of jimjam; yet, when people start taking that type of charge seriously in the abstract and applying it generally to all politicians, suddenly what Trump detractors are attempting to charge Trump with in hopes of undermining public support for him are actions that they take for themselves in their day-to-day lives for the benefit of their own families. So when Trump starts applying the types of charges applied to him to other Washington pols, suddenly everyone in Washington gets decidedly uncomfortable. When you see how someone like Romney behaves towards Trump, doesn't it get you thinking that maybe Romney has helped his kid along in some way that may be improper or he's just trying to further his own political fortunes and that he's not altogether serious about the latest iteration of the establishment coup against Trump? After all, isn't Mitt Romney the son of George Romney, as George W. and Jeb Bush are of George H.W. Bush, and Prescott Bush is the son of Jeb Bush, and Patrick Kennedy is the son of Ted Kennedy, or Nancy Pelosi is the daughter of Thomas D'Alesandro? Do you see why people are uncomfortable with what Trump is doing to Biden and why they speak of impeaching Trump in spite of the complete lack of a crime?
Rancid wrote:This is why it should not be hosted there. That's it that's all.
That's fair enough. However, no law is broken here, so it's a judgement call. Trump isn't breaking the law, but he's tweaking the establishment to no end. Do you have no problem with George H.W. Bush being the son of Senator Prescott Bush, and his son's being president of the United States and governor of Texas and Florida, and his grandson holding statewide office in Texas? That's four generations. It starts to smell a lot like royalty doesn't it? The difference is that they assign other political allies to profit from their offices, not handing things off to their own enterprises at cost. Trump is exposing that sort of thing, which is why I like him. It's not that I think he's the new Emily Post for a new type of etiquette.
Rancid wrote:Ultimately, I don't care about political parties like you do.
What makes you think I care about political parties? I've been cheering Trump along since 2015 from the inception to fuck over his own political party--people like John McCain, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush, and people who have had generations of their families in politics. Do you really think I give a fuck about the Republicans or Democrats? I don't like Trump for who he is. I like Trump for who he is not. So if I'm going to get interested in politicians self dealing, I will always focus on the establishment first. Hell, I cheered on AOC for the same reason--she's completely fucking over the Democratic party establishment. This is my payback for illegal immigration and bailing out Wall Street at middle class expense. As Trump himself said to the effect, "If I shot someone on fifth avenue, it would have no impact on my support." If he shot some nondescript person who didn't have it coming, I would no longer support Trump. If he shot someone like Hillary Clinton, I would just laugh. I would even drop support for Trump if he shot AOC. It's the establishment I don't like anymore. Hillary Clinton calling Tulsi Gabbard a Russian asset is the sort of thing that makes me despise the establishment and the deep state. John McCain, son of John McCain, etc., etc., etc. I'm very copacetic with Trump hammering these people. I find it very refreshing and entertaining.
jimjam wrote:"Obese Donald is allowed to do anything he wants to because (fill in the blanc with either Hillary, Biden ,Obama or Al Capone) are worse ……."
Trump hasn't committed a crime, yet he has been investigated for crimes alleged by people who have committed them who themselves have not been prosecuted--even when they are dead to rights. Trump can do what he likes, provided it's not criminal. Clinton can do what she likes if it's criminal or not, because the deep state protects her when she commits crimes. Biden may have committed a crime too, but we won't know until investigations are undertaken. His conflict of interest is obvious for everyone to see. So is Trump's. However, Trump removed his firms to a revocable trust and has profits from government-related business donated to the treasury. Conflict resolved. We don't see that type of behavior from his detractors. Similarly, we don't see Don Jr. or Eric Trump getting billions of dollars from the Chinese or sitting on the board of companies in countries where his father is affecting foreign policy decisions. Trump's body-mass-index has nothing to do with this either.
Hindsite wrote:All Mulvaney admitted to is what the U.S. government has been doing in foreign policy for many years. The Democrats were okay with it when they were in power. However, he later clarified that there was no quid pro quo in relation to Trump requesting a favor from Ukraine. In fact, the President of Ukraine has said that he did not know that any aid had been held back or delayed at the time. Therefore, there could not have been a quid pro quo for that.
A quid pro quo of an official act for an official act isn't criminal anyway. So it wouldn't matter if there were a quid pro quo. Biden's quid pro quo is not criminal by itself. It's the fact that the prosecutor was investigating his son's company that puts the official act into question. "Collusion" is not a crime itself either, as was detailed in the Mueller report. If Trump had commissioned the Russians to hack email servers, that would have been criminal. However, there is absolutely no evidence that he did. There is evidence that insiders did it, such as Seth Rich--i.e., Bernie Sanders acolytes.
It's kind of interesting watching Trump detractors now, because they still seem to think collusion is some sort of crime (or they want us to believe it, but only as it applies to Trump), and yet are deathly afraid of Trump exposing their collusion. It's patently obvious that Washington is a cesspool of interbred multi-generational pols who cover for each other across party lines due to their inter-marriages, private fraternal memberships, and the like. It's becoming patently obvious why the United States had no peer competitors in when George H.W. Bush was in office, and the establishment sold out the United States over the last 30 years to a communist dictatorship. To hell with the lot of them.
Totally unrelated sidenote: I saw Joker today. I wonder if they picked up on my midget meme. He he he.
"If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black."
-- Joe Biden to DJ Charlamagne tha God