Apparently Trump Draining The Swamp Of Lobbyists & Crony Capitalists Requires A Lot Of Lobbyists & Crony Capitalists
from the funny-how-that-works dept
I get that this is how politics works, but this is just a pretty stark and extreme example. A big part of Donald Trump's pitch to the public was about getting rid of the "corruption" in DC, that was sure to follow with Clinton, and her close connections to various lobbyists and Wall Street in particular. Here's what Trump campaign CEO (and, apparently, lead candidate for White House Chief of Staff) Steve Bannon told Bloomberg this week about the campaign:“Those elites [Trump rails against] are represented in Washington by a bevy of lobbyists,” says Bannon. “Crony capitalism has gotten out of control. Trump saw this. The American people saw this. And they have risen up to smash it. Ordinary people want to make sure we have an evenhanded system that’s transparent and accountable and takes their interests into mind. And they want to share in the rewards.”This was most clearly put forth with the phrase "drain the swamp," which the public was told was about "removing corruption and greed in local and federal government."
So, how's that going? Well, as soon as the victory was announced, with it came the news that basically his entire transition team was made up of top influence peddling lobbyists. The NY Times has an article about how old lobbyists and power brokers in DC are practically giddy in being able to shape the new administration. They're even out there mocking the "drain the swamp" phrase already:
“Trump has pledged to change things in Washington — about draining the swamp,” said Mr. [Trent] Lott, who now works at Squire Patton Boggs, a law and lobbying firm. “He is going to need some people to help guide him through the swamp — how do you get in and how you get out? We are prepared to help do that.”Yeah, suuuuuuuuuuuuuure. The best way to "drain the swamp" is to hand it over to the alligators who make it their home and who have gotten fat off the swamp? The swamp sure is pretty crowded too:
— Cindy Hayden of tobacco company Altria is in charge of Homeland Security.That swamp is looking mighty damp. And this doesn't touch on the fact that top execs from Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan have been floated as Trump's Treasury Secretary. Draining that swamp, huh? Remember Bannon's quote about how people were sick of Clinton's ties to Wall Street? Should we remind you that Bannon used to work at Goldman Sachs himself?
— Steve Hart, the chairman of Williams & Jensen, is in charge of Labor. His clients include Visa, the American Council of Life Insurers, Anthem, Cheniere Energy, Coca-Cola, General Electric, HSBC, Pfixer, PhRMA and United Airlines. He worked at the Labor Department in the Pension Welfare Benefits Program and on the Office of Management and Budget's ERISA Reorganization Task Force under Ronald Reagan.
— For the Energy Department, Michael McKenna of MWR Strategies lobbies for Engie (formerly GDF Suez), Southern Company and Dow Chemical.
— For Interior, David Bernhardt of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck lobbies for the Westlands Water District and used to represent Freeport LNG Expansion and Rosemont Copper Company. He was the Interior Department's solicitor, deputy solicitor, deputy chief of staff, counselor to the secretary of the Interior and director of the Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs under George W. Bush.
— Michael Torrey, who has the Agriculture portfolio, has his own firm representing the American Beverage Association and the Crop Insurance and Reinsurance Bureau.
— Mira Ricardel, tasked with defense, isn't a registered lobbyist but is a consultant for Federal Budget IQ, a government research firm. Until recently she worked for Boeing.
— Dan DiMicco, overseeing the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, serves on Duke Energy's board and represents steel company Nucor (of which he used to be CEO) on the U.S. Council on Competitiveness and the Coalition for a Prosperous America.
— Paul Atkins, though not a lobbyist, is CEO of advisory firm Patomak Global Partners and charged with independent financial agencies.
— Ken Blackwell, in charge of domestic issues, isn't a lobbyist but is a senior fellow of the Family Research Council, which does lobbying.
Anyway, let's just address two responses I'm sure will likely appear in the comments below -- perhaps by people so furious that we're insulting "their guy" that they won't read this far: Yes, Clinton would have brought in probably just as many lobbyists. Just as President Obama campaigned on stopping the power of lobbyists in DC... and then went ahead and brought a bunch into his administration, it's almost certain that Clinton would have done the same. But the Trump campaign's explicit claim was that it would be breaking away from lobbyists, crony capitalists and close ties to Wall Street at the very time it was bringing those people into the campaign.
Yes, these lobbyists do have some expertise. This was the main pushback when I jokingly tweeted about these Wall St. execs' names being tossed around for Treasury Secretary. It's true that they have experience and knowledge of how the system works. And it's also (frankly) why I think when people get all worked up about "lobbyists" they are totally missing the point. There are reasons why lobbyists do what they do and it's because they know the system. That has both good sides and bad sides. But, a true leader is one willing to admit that and explain that, rather than flat out lying about it. Don't say "drain the swamp" and promise an end to special interests, lobbyists and crony capitalists and then immediately bring a metric ton of them into your administration. That's called lying to the public. Which, I guess, is also something that many lobbyists have some experience with.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: corporate cronyism, donald trump, drain the swamp, lobbyists, trent lott
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I also look at the other people he's bringing in that are outsiders. They may speak well and make the little people confident in what they say but are they really up to the elevated positions?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sheesh, TechDirt is starting to turn into ESPN. I just want tech news, not incessant Trump-bashing or whining about black lives not mattering and 31 Baskin-Robbins flavors of gender identities not being validated by deplorable cis scum.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So soon?
.
But more pressing than Trump's impending court date for CHILD ABUSE and a protracted Constitutional fight that might see California separate from the "Union (see, http://www.yescalifornia.org/ )", are the current cries involving the entire Elections Process (that saw demonstrations in 25 U.S. cities in the past two days alone!), and a call for a legal challenge to the Electoral College (among other legal challenges!)! Simply put... the entire U.S. Elections Process is now under review!
.
A-M-E-R-I-C-A-N D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y I-S D-E-A-D!... and this just completed U.S. Election, is a testament to that reality!
.
There are a few details that most wanna-be and would-be supporters of "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y" should be made aware of! And!... the question to be asked, is:... DID MOST AMERICANS ACTUALLY DESIRE A HILLARY... OR A DONALD... ON E-I-T-H-E-R S-I-D-E OF THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM?
.
If I may!... I would like us to reflect on what's really happened here!... and, on what really counts! Was this "democratic vote" more "P-S-E-U-D-O-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C", than not?... and!... did the "T-R-U-E M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y" of the people of America find their "wills" reflected in this "democratic election"?... or!... were their "wills", in fact-- and in many cases!-- N-O-W-H-E-R-E T-O B-E F-O-U-N-D?
.
How is it "DEMOCRATIC"-- e.g.!-- when the Brexit Referendum "win" of Thursday, June 23rd, 2016, was "won" W-I-T-H-O-U-T the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M of 50+% of the T-O-T-A-L N-U-M-B-E-R of ELIGIBLE BRITISH VOTERS' VOTES?... AND!... NOT JUST, by way of a majority of those who've decided to cast a vote! In other words, how can L-E-S-S than the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M of 50+% of the T-O-T-A-L N-U-M-B-E-R of eligible British voters' votes, constitute a "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y"? It is-- de facto!-- I-M-P-O-S-S-I-B-L-E (i.e., without God!)! And thus, the Brexit vote is a further example of a "P-S-E-U-D-O-D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-S-E-U-D-O-P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y" "winning the day"!
.
To compare the Brexit Referendum to an election of a candidate within a Electoral District... if fifty thousand eligible voters decide not to vote in a District that is composed/ comprised of one hundred thousand eligible voters... and five candidates are running!... the math would suggest, that no candidate could possibly obtain a "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y" from the remaining fifty thousand eligible voters who have cast a vote! Unless!... and of course!... A H-I-J-A-C-K-E-D, AND E-L-I-T-I-S-T P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L P-R-O-C-E-S-S SIMPLY MARGINALIZES THOSE WHO HAVE NOT SHOWN UP TO VOTE; AND THEN, DICTATES THAT THEIR "NO SHOW"/ ABSENCE, CANNOT-- AND SHOULD NOT!-- BE HELD "B-I-N-D-I-N-G" IN SOME FASHION, OR FORM (AND SOME "NO SHOWS" ARE AS SUCH, DUE TO DISABILITY, AND/ OR INFIRMITY!... NOT TO MENTION, THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN SYSTEMICALLY AND SYSTEMATICALLY DISCRIMINATED AGAINST, DUE TO THEIR Y-O-U-T-H!)! FOR!... OUT OF SIGHT, IS OUT OF MIND!
.
Simply put!... and to return to the Brexit Referendum!... the said total of 17,410,742. "winning" "pro Brexit" British voters, plus the said total of 16,141,242. "losing" "pro Bremain" eligible British voters, who-- together!-- showed up at the "Referendum ballot boxes (i.e., 33,551,984 eligible British voters!)", are in contrast to the ACTUAL TOTAL of 46,499,537 eligible British voters (see Google result, Electoral Commission | Provisional electorate figures published!... AND, LET ALONE, THE EVEN HIGHER ACTUAL TOTAL NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS' VOTES TO BE HAD, IF MANY OF THE DISABLED/ INFIRMED BRITISH CITIZENS WERE "ACCOMMODATED"!... AND!... IF MANY BRITISH YOUTH WEREN'T THE TARGETS OF "P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L A-N-D S-O-C-I-A-L P-A-T-E-R-N-A-L-I-S-T-I-C A-G-E-I-S-M"!)!... and reveals a deficit of 12,947,553. of the ACTUAL TOTAL NUMBER of eligible British voters, and a deficit of 5,839,027. eligible British voters for even a "B-A-R-E M-I-N-I-M-U-M M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-N (i.e., 46,499,537. ÷ 2 = 23,249,768.5... + .5 = [23,249,769.] - 17,410,742. = 5,839,027.!)"! AND THEREFORE, THE COMBINED "WINNERS" AND "LOSERS" TALLY OF ELIGIBLE VOTERS, S-H-O-U-L-D N-O-T B-E M-A-D-E S-Y-N-O-N-Y-M-O-U-S W-I-T-H T-H-E A-C-T-U-A-L T-O-T-A-L- N-U-M-B-E-R O-F E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E B-R-I-T-I-S-H V-O-T-E-R-S/ V-O-T-E-S!... AND!... THE "WINNING TALLY", S-H-O-U-L-D N-O-T B-E M-A-D-E S-Y-N-O-N-Y-M-O-U-S W-I-T-H T-H-E "M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-L-L" O-F T-H-E E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E V-O-T-E-R-S O-F B-R-I-T-A-I-N! AND!... THEREFORE!... THE "WINNING TALLY" OF ELIGIBLE BRITISH VOTERS-- AT LEAST!-- SHOULD BE MET WITH A C-O-N-S-T-I-T-U-T-I-O-N-A-L C-H-A-L-L-E-N-G-E (TO START!) FOR THE FLAGRANT BREACH OF THE "L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E P-R-I-N-C-I-P-L-E-S" O-F D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y (I.E., AND E.G., IN THE F-A-I-L-U-R-E OF THE BREXIT REFERENDUM RESULT TOTAL, TO ACHIEVE EVEN A BARE MINIMUM MAJORITY TALLY, FOR A 'M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y W-I-N'!)"!
.
And so!... the Brexit "win"... like the "wins" seen so often in our PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PSEUDOELECTIONS!... I-S A S-H-A-M!! And!... it escapes me, why citizens from respective "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-I-E-S" from around the world, haven't challenged these scurrilous, and shameful "F-A-U-X P-U-B-L-I-C R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-A"!... AND PSEUDOELECTIONS!... AND!... haven't brought civil proceedings against any and all institutions, which have allowed these G-L-O-B-A-L F-A-R-C-E-S to continue! And thus... re the Brexit Referendum result!... it's my contention, that the Brexit Referendum is D-E-F-E-A-T-A-B-L-E, due to it's inherent S-Y-S-T-E-M-I-C V-I-O-L-A-T-I-O-N of the "L-E-G-I-T-I-M-A-T-E P-R-I-N-C-I-P-L-E-S" OF DEMOCRACY!
.
This horrendous situation involving our PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PSEUDOELECTIONS, has resulted in "winning candidates" winning with as little as 1/5th of the total number of eligible voters' votes!... AND!... THEN DARING, TO CALL SUCH RESPECTIVE "WINS", D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C! A-N-D W-O-R-S-E!... and in the case of the Brexit Referendum result (AND "PSEUDOWIN"!)!... such a "W-I-N" could-- POTENTIALLY!-- compromise the security of an E-N-T-I-R-E N-A-T-I-O-N! And so!... it's no wonder why so many citizens within our respective "democracies (so-called!)" hate the elections process!... and hate, Public Referenda!
.
And!... to add Elections insult to Elections injury, there are "Parties" within countries... and again, composed of "winning candidates" who have "won" with L-E-S-S than the E-S-S-E-N-T-I-A-L M-I-N-I-M-U-M needed for a D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y!... whose leadership (e.g., in Canada!), cannot be chosen, D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y by the PEOPLE!... and O-N-L-Y, by the Party! And further, rather than have the brightest!... the best!... "winning candidates" from all across a country-- and, from across a legislature's floor!-- forming Executive Cabinets (and in Canada!... for example!... composed of Ministers of Federal Departments, or Provincial Ministries!)!... A-N-D T-H-R-O-U-G-H A N-O-N P-A-R-T-Y_B-A-S-E-D L-E-G-I-S-L-A-T-U-R-E O-R P-A-R-L-I-A-M-E-N-T (and something, incidentally, that municipalities have been doing for generations!... A-N-D W-O-R-L-D-W-I-D-E)!... our current "PARTY-BASED DEMOCRACIES" have chosen, instead-- A-N-D V-I-R-T-U-A-L-L-Y!-- GANGS, CLIQUES, AND "P-S-E-U-D-O-S-O-C-I-A-L I-N-T-E-R-E-S-T-S", TO ACT AS "GO-BETWEENS" FOR PARTY-BASED "OLIGARCHIC BACKROOM BOYZ"!
.
But!... if all of this wasn't bad enough, there's no "NONE OF THE ABOVE" option on millions of voters' ballots (AND "B-I-N-D-I-N-G"!... AS A PREREQUISITE!)!... nor, an "AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION" of the "NO SHOWS (i.e., eligible voters who have NOT cast a vote!)" to "B-I-N-D-I-N-G" "NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS (inasmuch, as such 'NO SHOWS', can't be translated as being 'F-O-R', any candidate!)"! (BUT!... PLEASE NOTE!... IF OUR "NO SHOWS" AS SUCH, ARE DUE TO OUR P-O-L-I-T-I-C-A-L A-N-D S-O-C-I-A-L I-N-A-B-I-L-I-T-Y-- O-R, U-N-W-I-L-L-I-N-G-N-E-S-S!-- TO ADDRESS THE VOTER NEEDS OF OUR DISABLED/ INFIRMED!... AND, OUR YOUTH!... THEN SUCH "INABLED", OR "UNWILLING", SHOULD BE "H-E-L-P-E-D" RE THEIR "I-N-A-B-I-L-T-Y"!... OR H-E-L-D T-O A-C-C-O-U-N-T FOR THEIR "U-N-W-I-L-L-I-N-G-N-E-S-S"!) And, had the "NONE OF THE ABOVE" and the "TRANSLATED NO SHOW" provisions been addressed, many "NO SHOWS" would have shown up to vote (for fear of receiving a MANADATED "BINDING" "AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION"!)! And!... if combined "NO SHOW TRANSLATIONS", together with directly cast "NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS" were implemented (wherein-- TOGETHER!-- these OUTNUMBER the votes cast for any respective "running candidate"!), this combined tally could have meant the introduction of "lottery lists" of candidates within respective Districts (preselected!... and the members in which, would not be eligible to run as "running candidates"!)!... from which, our "winners" could have then been chosen! And thereby!... E-F-F-E-C-T-I-N-G F-U-L-L R-E-P-R-E-S-E-N-T-A-T-I-O-N F-O-R E-V-E-R-Y S-I-N-G-L-E E-L-I-G-I-B-L-E V-O-T-E-R, A-N-D V-O-T-E!
.
And!... to juxtapose the just aforesaid template onto Referenda!... and onto the Brexit Referendum, in particular!... if the directly cast "NONE OF THE ABOVE BALLOTS", combined with the "TRANSLATED NO SHOWS", OUTWEIGHED the votes cast for either the Brexit or Bremain scenarios, then NEITHER Brexit, nor Bremain, would be left on the table! And the MPs of the British Parliament, would then be forced to renew their respective individual approaches, and collective approach, re their "arrangement" with the EU!... and, their respective dialogues, and collective dialogue, with the citizens of Britain!
.
And given... and in contrast to the abovenoted!... in the light of the process that was implementated for the Brexit Referendum (yet to be revealed!)!... WELL!... you have the makings of a P-O-O-R E-X-C-U-S-E F-O-R A D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C R-E-F-E-R-E-N-D-U-M!... A-N-D A P-O-O-R "R-A-T-I-O-N-A-L B-A-S-I-S" F-O-R T-H-E R-E-D-I-R-E-C-T-I-O-N O-F T-H-E F-U-T-U-R-E C-O-U-R-S-E F-O-R A-N E-N-T-I-R-E C-O-U-N-T-R-Y!!
.
To sum up... what we have, presently, are PSEUDODEMOCRATIC PLURALITIES IN THE GUISE OF "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y E-L-E-C-T-E-D" REPRESENTATIVES! An intolerable situation!... and deserving of both Constitutional challenges, and Tort action! And!... A-N-Y O-T-H-E-R ACCEPTED PLURALITY OTHER THAN A "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T-I-C P-L-U-R-A-L-I-T-Y" ACCEPTED BY A PROSPECTIVE CANDIDATE, AND/ OR BY A PROSPECTIVE VOTER (AND BASED UPON THE "LEGITIMATE PRINCIPLES" OF DEMOCRACY, AS AFOREMENTIONED!... AND OTHER, THAN ONE INSTITUTED BY GOD!)!, IS A CANDIDATE, OR VOTER, WHO IS EITHER BLIND TO THE "LEGITIMATE PRINCIPLES" OF DEMOCRACY, OR WHO IS A TRAITOR TO THE "LEGITIMATE PRINCIPLES" OF DEMOCRACY! AND!... WHO IS EITHER BLIND, OR A TRAITOR, TO THE COMMON GOOD OF THE PEOPLE!
.
THEREFORE, THE "J-U-S-T ESTABLISHMENT" OF "T-R-U-E DEMOCRATIC PLURALITIES" WITHIN OUR RESPECTIVE REFERENDA, AND ELECTIONS PROCESSES, IS F-U-N-D-A-M-E-N-T-A-L TO THE VERY REALIZATION OF "D-E-M-O-C-R-A-C-Y"!... AND!... WITHOUT WHICH, WE ARE SUBJECT TO MERE OLIGARCHIC WHIM!
.
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If you don't like what is written, you don't have to read it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Fighting fire with fire.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The post here is showing how the actions of the president doesn't seem to add up to campaign promises in that area. At least not yet!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
.
For your information... AND SOMETHING YOU DESPARATELY LACK!... "politics" is as much of a "TECHNE" as ICT, or any other "art", "craft", "field" or "vocation" that comprises our countless human systems! Indeed!... and in fact!... "broom making" is as much of a "tech" or "TECHNE" as is ICT! And a "broom" and "sweeping with a broom", are as much examples of "broom making's" "TECHNOMA (i.e., its products and services!)", as any "TECHNOMAE (the plural of TECHNOMA!)" associated with ICT!
.
And so... and to close... the "TechDirt"-- as such!-- should be about exploring the "dirt" associated with A-L-L "TECHNEA", by definition! But!... even if one desires to delimit the type of "TECHNE" to be pursued in this site to ICT's "TECHNE"... well!... there's N-O-T-H-I-N-G that (by definition!) precludes-- should preclude!-- the inclusion of "other" "TECHNE" that/ which impacts on ICT's TECHNOMAE (i.e., products and services!)!... and, which includes the "TECHNEA" of "politics", "health", "policing", "justice", and etc., and etc.!
.
In other words, instead of W-H-I-N-I-N-G about how this site is B-E-N-D-I-N-G Y-O-U-R B-R-A-I-N to the point of breaking... try grabbing a dictionary!... and leave our host to pursue his "TECHNE"!
.
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So soon?
Why not wait and see what happens
We are. And he went and immediately went back on the key part of the campaign promise concerning corruption and lobbyists.
You think we should ignore that?
It looks like you've received your marching orders
If you think that, you're a fool.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
The election is over. Can you guys go back to writing about IP and the NSA, and keep the politics to a minimum or not at all? Or at least let your readers filter out the political stories.
This isn't about politics. A big part of what we've ALWAYS covered is the problem of crony capitalism in leading to harm for innovation, free expression, civil liberties and the like.
This story fits right in with that.
Sheesh, TechDirt is starting to turn into ESPN. I just want tech news, not incessant Trump-bashing or whining about black lives not mattering and 31 Baskin-Robbins flavors of gender identities not being validated by deplorable cis scum.
If you want us to ignore what's actually happening and how it impacts the things that we normally cover, go find yourself an echo chamber to live in.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So soon?
And no amount of insulting his avatar is going to change that Skippy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
He needs to have the people that know how the swamp works to drain it.
Oh yes, of course...
I guess its better to try and rationalize why he's not doing what he vehemently said he would do than to accept that you got swindled by a con man.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
The alternative was to be swindled by a con woman. But thankfully she felt the Bern!
Well, at least you're admitting that Trump is in fact, a con man. A little honesty that he's exactly the asshole we thought he would be is refreshing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
If all the baiting during the election was just a show, fine, get with Bernie and get fix the money. That's what all his supporters really care about, and that's something Democrats would help with. They might even help him get past the Republican Congress at some point. But only if he is serious about the meaningful parts of his campaign.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Trump breaking promises, and that is yet to be seen, is no different than all the political promises laying by the wayside by every last president ever.
But HRC on the other hand rigged the primary and attempted to do so with the debates. That is a special kind of crooked.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52EoprTSouU
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So are you admitting that Hillary is crooked? She rigged the Democratic primary for goodness sake. And you still voted for her. Doesn't say much for you or the left does it?
Well, what difference does it make?
She lost, and now we have president-elect Trump.
He promised to drain the swamp and instead he's looking like he's keeping it well filled. Are you going to address that, or just keep bringing up Hillary?
is no different than all the political promises laying by the wayside by every last president ever.
So he's just another liar. And that's better. Got it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ken Blackwell really gets around!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You lost there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"That's called lying to the public."
Pffft!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Those people are the swamp. They absolutely will not allow it to be drained. It was an easy con to spot a mile off, but apparently lots a of people fell for it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lobbyists and cronies
Even if Trump didn't have a single one on his staff, that wouldn't change the fact that they're everywhere in Congress...And they will still be able to write their favorite bills and influence legislators.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
In fact reminds me of every betrayed fanboi ever trying to twist facts to align with their simplistic, gullible beliefs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Buyer's remorse won't take long
1. Trump
He's held to that HIS ENTIRE LIFE. He has screwed over business partners, employees, family, friends, suppliers, banks, anyone and everyone who has ever come into contact with him.
There is no reason to expect that "people who voted for him" won't make that list. He no longer needs them. He will never need them again.
So the gullible chumps who voted for him thinking he'd "drain the swamp" or "beat ISIS" or "do XYZ" are about to find out that he has no intention of doing most of those things, because they don't serve the cause of Trump. The only things he will do are those that mean something to him, e.g., taking revenge on all his enemies, real or perceived.
Those of us equipped with superior intelligence did try to tell all of you with inferior minds. But you weren't even bright enough to listen. Pity. You will suffer the most from your own naivete'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So soon?
.
Please!... no emails!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Before that he was big tobaccos reputation management guy.
I guess hiring the old farts is by far a better angle than mister "thank you for smoking" and "...as for carbon dioxide, it isn't smog or smoke, it's what we breathe out and plants breathe in. They call it pollution. We call it life!".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trump Is Being Republicanized
Far from shaking up the Republican Party, looks like it is putting him very firmly under its thumb. According to this report, his anti-Obamacare plan is being seriously watered down in some ways, in particular his plans to allow importation of medicines and force price transparency are gone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: So soon?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That's wrong on so many levels except one: more than half of 500 or so people voted for him. That's all.
Nobody got "half the country", not even "half the voters" to vote for him/her. And Clinton got more citizens' votes than the so-called "winner". His legitimacy is real, but only based on a very undemocratic election system.
Guys, your system is broken and you're too arrogant to see it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The problem with draining the swamp is...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: So soon?
"I don't know what you take, but it's either too much or not enough."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/12/us/politics/12obama.html
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me ter/statements/2010/jan/27/barack-obama/obama-says-lobbyists-have-been-excluded-policy-mak/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: this was a campaign promise from Obama as well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: So soon?
It's interesting to watch Trump's supporters try to avoid having Trump's feet held to the very fire he himself built.
He sold himself to the downtrodden working class as the Drainer in Chief. It'll be interesting to see how he gets the inhabitants of the swamp to "show him" how to drain their livelihood.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Trump hosted The Apprentice for 14 years (a.k.a. "the job interview from hell"), presumably he's pretty good at hiring people. The rumors in the news are just that: rumors. Trump was busy Thursday (w/ the DC visit) and Friday (w/ press interviews, although he did have enough time to demote Chris Christie and expand the team to include Peter Thiel and his family). The PTT has now gone radio-silent, so Trump probably did a big shake-up yesterday and the team is now focused on reviewing applications and reading this guide. Trump's platform is strongly against revolving door careers so I'd guess that most of the politicians/lobbyists on his team aren't eligible for positions in the administration. But meanwhile, unless you have an in with the administration, there's not much to do besides wait and see.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Trump was on The Apprentice from 2004 to 2015. I guess you're using Trump math.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Like collects like
although he did have enough time to demote Chris Christie and expand the team to include Peter Thiel and his family).
So lemme get this straight: Peter Thiel is now on Team Trump. This Peter Thiel I'm guessing, the guy who bankrolled a lawyer for the express purpose of suing a company into oblivion because he didn't like them?
Oh yeah, that makes me feel so much better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What is tech without freedom?
Bet any amount you want, those in control want backdoors on every single item that you can purchase. They are willing to stack SCOTUS and violate every single item in the Bill of Rights they possibly can so they can stick it to anybody they want to. Cough, excuse me. *need* to.
Why? To *protect the children* from the big bad internet where people, outsiders mostly, want to share information. Radical information, about how democracy works, what a republic is and how to secure your personal data from big brother snooping.
If you aren't in Tech, bug off. If you don't know how all this is connected, then ask. But you really cannot tell us to support the con man, the man with a fraud trail coming up as well as a charge for raping a 13yo woman. Couldn't be a child at 13yo could she? No, she dressed like any pussy that wanted to be grabbed.
Don't they all?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Say "boogeyman" instead, you partisan hack, AC!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Nobody has picked a side by virtue of not being on yours.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
He spoke about this last night on 60 Minutes where he admitted that he needed some insiders who know the system to help.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: this was a campaign promise from Obama as well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]