Supporter of Possible Sexual Deviants
Since its happening I thought its time we had a thread on it.
We’ve got to get our drug industry back. Our drug industry has been disastrous. They’re leaving left and right. They supply our drugs, but they don’t make them here, to a large extent. And the other thing we have to do is create new bidding procedures for the drug industry because they’re getting away with murder.
Pharma, pharma has a lot of lobbies and a lot of lobbyists and a lot of power and there’s very little bidding on drugs. We’re the largest buyer of drugs in the world and yet we don’t bid properly and we’re going to start bidding and we’re going to save billions of dollars over a period of time.
And we’re going to do that with a lot of other industries. I’m very much involved with the generals and admirals on the airplane, the F-35, you’ve been reading about it. And it’s way, way behind schedule and many, many billions of dollars over budget. I don’t like that. And the admirals have been fantastic, the generals have been fantastic. I’ve really gotten to know them well. And we’re going to do some big things on the F-35 program…
The Machine was interested in thoughts on Trump's business plan for his empire. I'm of two minds on this:
-on the one hand, we've GOT to maintain clear ethical and moral guidelines on what the president can and cannot do with his power when it comes to personal or familial enrichment. in this situation, clearly it would be to make Trump sell off his entire empire. make a clear break so that we know he's not giving favors to enrich his family or business.
-on the other hand, we've never had a business man as president. and DEFINITELY not a businessman like this. how the fuck are we to expect him to just sell off his entire empire that he's spent his whole life building, for what would undoubtably be pennies on the dollar? even if he does keep the business in the family, they're just hotels. yes, he could favor an economic deal with a country where he has hotels, but he has hotels in numerous countries already. is he going to sell us out to every country on earth? plus, these people need to stay somewhere. is it really that big of a difference if they stay in a starwoods hotel vs. a trump hotel? does this really matter in the long term scheme of things?
in regards to the appointing of jared kushner, i do not see a problem with this. the law was put into place to keep people from taking appointed positions in the government. if he's got a kid or relation he trusts, why wouldn't he want them around?
see, he's rubbing off on you already!
-on the other hand, we've never had a business man as president. and DEFINITELY not a businessman like this. how the fuck are we to expect him to just sell off his entire empire that he's spent his whole life building, for what would undoubtably be pennies on the dollar?
but that's not his fault. its our fault. he never agreed to do any of this shit ahead of time. if the people of the country had a problem with this before the election they shouldn't have voted for him.He wanted the job and it's not the public's fault that he didn't think this all through. If he can't live with it then he simply needs to resign.
but that's not his fault. its our fault. he never agreed to do any of this shit ahead of time. if the people of the country had a problem with this before the election they shouldn't have voted for him.
as far as the ethical rules, how many of our wonderful congressmen and women continue to hold onto property or investments that they benefit from? if we're going to wring our hands over trump then it need to be from top to bottom. none of this bullshit just with him because he's not on your/our/their team.
That's EXACTLY how this country works when you've got as much money as Trump does. You're deluding yourself to think otherwise.You don't get to take a job and not agree to the rules. Life doesn't work that way.
How's that working out for us?Politicians who try to avoid playing by the rules face scrutiny all the time.
How's that working out for us?
no i didn't. i didn't insinuate anything. i flat out said he's being singled out. and that's ok that he is. these are complex issues we've never dealt with before. but the american people have overwhelmingly spoken that they don't really give a fuck about this particular issue.First you insinuate that Trump's being singled out as part of your typical partisan bullshit from him not being part of your/our/their team and then when it's pointed out that politicians face scrutiny over these issues all the time you reply with this?
no, no they're not put in check at all. and even when they are found out, they hardly ever lose their jobs. charlie rangel, alan grayson, david vitter, the keating five, tom delay, etc. et. al.. the list goes on and on and on and on and on. not to mention the extensive insider trading that goes on. remember that big fuss they made about banning it a few years ago? yeah, they went and rolled it back:The system isn't perfect but politicians are put in check for similar ethical issues frequently. If you disagree spend a little time researching it before you reply. Ethical rules relating to enriching oneself or one's family while holding a public job or office are nothing new. Neither is the intent to enforce them.
Congress Quickly And Quietly Rolls Back Insider Trading Rules For Itself
from the can't-mess-with-the-profits dept
In November of 2011, the TV show 60 Minutes did a big expose on insider trading within Congress. While everyone else is subject to basic insider trading rules, it turned out that members of Congress were exempt from the rules. And, as you would imagine, many in Congress have access to market-moving, non-public information. And they made use of it. To make lots and lots of money. Of course, after that report came out and got lots of attention, Congress had to act, and within months they had passed the STOCK Act with overwhelming support in Congress to make insider trading laws that apply to everyone else finally apply to Congress and Congressional staffers as well. As that link notes:The lopsided votes showed lawmakers desperate to regain public trust in an election year, when the public approval rating of Congress has sunk below 15 percent.Of course, here we are in 2013 and, lo and behold, it is no longer an election year. And apparently some of the details of the ban on insider trading were beginning to chafe Congressional staffers, who found it hard to pad their income with some friendly trades on insider knowledge.
So... with very little fanfare, Congress quietly rolled back a big part of the law late last week. Specifically the part that required staffers to post disclosures about their financial transactions, so that the public could make sure there was no insider trading going on. Congress tried to cover up this fairly significant change because they, themselves, claimed that it would pose a "national risk" to have this information public. A national risk to their bank accounts.
It was such a national risk that Congress did the whole thing quietly, with no debate. The bill was introduced in the Senate on Thursday and quickly voted on late that night when no one was paying attention. Friday afternoon (the best time to sneak through news), the House picked it up by unanimous consent. The House ignored its own promise to give Congress three days to read a bill before holding a vote, because this kind of thing is too important to let anyone read the bill before Congress had to pass it.
And, of course, yesterday, President Obama signed it into law. Because the best way to rebuild trust in Congress, apparently, is to roll back the fact that people there need to obey the same laws as everyone else. That won't lead the public to think that Congress is corrupt. No, not at all.
no i didn't. i didn't insinuate anything. i flat out said he's being singled out. and that's ok that he is. these are complex issues we've never dealt with before. but the american people have overwhelmingly spoken that they don't really give a fuck about this particular issue.
no, no they're not put in check at all. and even when they are found out, they hardly ever lose their jobs. charlie rangel, alan grayson, david vitter, the keating five, tom delay, etc. et. al.. the list goes on and on and on and on and on. not to mention the extensive insider trading that goes on. remember that big fuss they made about banning it a few years ago? yeah, they went and rolled it back:
no he didn't get far less than the majority of votes. if you take california away he actually won on votes as well. so in 49 of the 50 states the people said "fuck it". for good or bad.Let's pretend for a second that everyone who cast a vote for Trump assumed he would proceed with the plan he announced on Wed and were 100% ok with it, he still got far less then the majority of votes. So I guess that means the American people have "overwhelmingly" spoken that they are ok with these shenanigans?
when i said singled out i didn't mean in a bad way, more that its the first time this particular situation has happened. you can put assets like investments or holdings in a blind trust. you can't put an entire business empire into one and its fairly stupid of these pundits to continue to press this issue. you're going to let some dumb jerkoffs run your business and have no one you know or trust run it? give me a break.As for being "singled out" what do you expect? He's about to be sworn in as the President of the United States and just announced an unprecedented game plan in regards to his business dealings. Blowing the outrage off as typical partisan bullshit doesn't demonstrate a strong understanding of the ethical issues at play here.
seemingly? they all got away practically scot free. why are you so indignant about the system being a complete trainwreck when it comes to this issue?Nice list of public officials who got seemingly got away with wrongdoings. So the fact that our imperfect system allows some assholes to get away with bullshit should have a substantial impact on how we view the issue at hand here with Trump? Whole system is fucked so why the hell are people upset about the future President's bullshit?
I'll keep expressing my view that what Trump proposed should not be allowed regardless of other failures in the system.
because it was a "charity" she was running and not a business. never mind that charity = racket in this instance. lets all pretend that she was just a fucking saint so the pussy grabber doesn't get into office.As an outsider, I am astonished at how such an obviously bent, bought and owned candidate like Hillary, particularly money from the Gulf, is being painted as some kind of social justice warrior and Mother Teresa type figure.
the government has long since abdicated this responsibility to "the states". and you see how well this is going in america.If you can't look after your own, it's game over, this is what we are learning in Europe. And soon enough when the money starts running out, we will experience the true and absolute limits of good intentions.
Here in Italy the news were literally licking Clinton's backside for the entire campaign, giving very little coverage to her scandals and blowing up the "grab them by the pussy" thing. When Trump won, the live shows and journalists were all clearly surprised, they really thought someone as corrupt and bought as Hillary would win and preserve the status quo.
Again, it's not that they're scrutinizing him. This is their job. It was that after ALL the scrutiny, the people voted him in anyway. The handwringing from liberals is ridiculous.
You see, a proper Italian man would never say it that directly, he'd do it, but with a good tempo and charm, we are not of the "Surprise Blitzkrieg in your face" camp. Explains why we lost the war, I guess, so you either are great at sex and a terrible warrior, or your are an efficient robot with terrible humour that is not laughing matter.Would have turned a lot of Italians for Trump no?
I'm an old lefty, not a liberal. This political party is filled with striving cocksuckers and people who think that they should be called ze or zin. They're just as good at selling out the working class as the republicans now anyway. See Corey Booker's latest bullshit in the politics comedy thread.This coming from you? Impressive.
I was disappointed by Gary Johnson, who turned out to be everything but a proper libertarian. One of the greatest banes in the US administration, I think, is the two party system; seriously, how can just two choices accurately represent the desires of a nation?I stopped watching all news channels at this point. Repubs and Dems establishments are all the same, cocksuckers. I am happy there is someone who is standing up against both parties, whether he will deliver is another story.